Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, County Hall, Dún Laoghaire, Co. Dublin. View directions

Items
No. Item

139.

MOTION NOS. 82, 83 AND 84 DEFERRED

It was proposed by Councillors N. Richmond, J. Madigan and T. Murphy and AGREED to defer consideration of Motion Nos. 82, 83 and 84 to the meeting scheduled for 12th February, 2015.

 

 

140.

DURATION OF MEETING

Following a query from a number of Members in relation to the duration of the meeting it was AGREED that the Members would endeavour to deal with 100 Motions at the meeting.  It was AGREED to review the matter during the course of the meeting.

 

 

141.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - MOTION NO. 74

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor S. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Page 77 policy E1 delete “are available” and insert “continue to be available”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

142.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - MOTION NO. 75 & 76

It was AGREED that Motion No. 75 in the name of Councillor M. Halpin and Motion No. 76  in the name of Councillor K. Gill be considered together.

 

Motion No. 75 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

 

 It was proposed by Councillor M. Halpin and seconded by Councillor H. Lewis.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Page 77 – Strategy

Amend Paragraph 1 to read as follows:

 

The strategic vision of this Plan is to support and facilitate economic development of the County across a range of sectors while acknowledging in particular the growing importance of the knowledge economy and the historic problem of unemployment blackspots across the County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 76 UNEMPLOYMENT

 

It was proposed by Councillor K. Gill and seconded by Councillor M. Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Page 78 New Policy E?

Tackling unemployment blackspots

The Council acknowledges the importance of technical education and the trades in the County. It is Council policy to support the work done by the Education and Training Boards in relation to courses previously provided under FAS and the establishment of Community Training Centres, Local Training Initiatives and Specialist Training Provision in the County.

It is important to note that areas of very high unemployment, specifically among the younger population, do not always benefit from a focus on third and fourth level education, jobs in the IT sector or enterprise and would benefit far more by the provision of the above types of training and skill development as well as traditional forms of employment via the public sector.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motions and the Chief Executive’s reports were AGREED.

 

 

143.

FOREIGN UNIVERSITY LINKS - MOTION NO. 78 & MOTION NO. 8 FROM THE FLOOR

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor M. Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in accordance with 3.1.2.4. Policy E4: Third and Fourth Level Institutions, that the following paragraph be inserted as a penultimate paragraph on page 78 in that section – “The Council will encourage the establishment in the County of ‘Irish campuses’ or ‘colleges’ of major overseas universities in order to attract foreign students, create international academic links, stimulate the economy and to facilitate the development of tourism, business and trade between the home cities of these overseas universities and this County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 8 from the Floor

 

Motion No. 8 from the floor in the names of Councillors M. Merrigan, V. Boyhan, J. Bailey, M. Bailey, was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan.

 

“Section Policy E4 – Third and Fourth Level Institutions

 

Amend Policy SSC8 to state:  “It is Council Policy to support the development and ongoing provision of Third and Fourth Level Institutions in the County including University College Dublin (Belfield and Carysfort campuses), Dún Laoghiare Institute of Art, Design and Technology, Blackrock Further Education Institute (Formerly Senior College Dún Laoghaire), DúnLaoghiare Further Education Institute (formerly Dún Laoghaire  College of Further Education), Sallynoggin College of Further Education, Stillorgan College of Further Education, Dundrum College of Further Education and any new Third and Fourth Level Institutions – including Irish colleges or major overseas universities whether within established campuses or in new campuses”.

 

It was AGREED to ACCEPT the Chief Executive’s report subject to the amendment proposed in Motion No 8 from the floor.

 

 

144.

FURTHER EDUCATION COLLEGES - MOTION NO. 77

It was proposed by Councillor K. Gill  and seconded by Councillor M. Merrigan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Page 78 New Policy E?

Further Education Institutions

 

The Council acknowledges the importance of colleges of further education in the county. These colleges provide important training and skills for students of all ages and are often a stepping stone to third level education. They are one of the few places where adults can return to college to attain an education from almost all of the disciplines. These colleges are also of direct importance to employment in the county as many teachers and tutors commute or move into the locality for work purposes.

 

The Council will work with all educational institutions to ensure their full development, to encourage the establishment of any new colleges and allow for the development of student accommodation where appropriate.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

145.

SOCIAL INCLUSION - MOTION NO. 79

It was proposed by Councillor. C. Curran and seconded by CouncillorK. Gill.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Section 3.1.2 Add a new policy within this section entitled Social Inclusion Contract

 

This Council notes the importance of promoting social inclusion through job creation and training. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council will ensure that any future procurement contracts will, in line with EU law, include particular conditions to promote opportunities for vocational training, education and employment for young people and long term unemployed.

To this end the Council may require particular conditions concerning performance of the Contract and that they are stated in the Contract Notice or in the Contract Documents. The contractors will be required under the Contract to support Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council’s commitment to these conditions.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

146.

ENTERPRISE INCUBATOR UNITS - MOTION NO. 80 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor C. Smyth and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To amend paragraph 3.1.2.9 Policy E9: Enterprise Incubator Units to (a) include in the first paragraph after “policy” on the first line “promote and assist”  (b) to replace the words “may be required” with “shall be required” on third last line.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion the following amendment was proposed by Councillor C. Smyth and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

To amend paragraph 3.1.2.9 Policy E9: Enterprise Incubator Units to include in the first paragraph after “policy” on the first line “promote and assist”

 

The amended Motion was AGREED.

 

 

147.

TOURISM - MOTION NO. 81 pdf icon PDF 29 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor J. Bailey.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in accordance with 3.1.2.13 Policy E13: Tourism and Recreation, the following two short paragraphs be inserted on page 81 – “The Council encourages the development of the tourism potential of the DART and LUAS lines to facilitate and attract ‘day trippers’ from Dublin City to visit the either the coastal areas of the County or its inland rural areas” and “The tourism potential of the County’s diaspora is recognised as an enormously important area for development and, therefore, the Council encourages the creation of heritage, genealogical and cultural tourism products and facilities in the County.”  

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

148.

NEIGHBOUR CENTRE - MOTION NO. 82 WITHDRAWN pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Additional documents:

The following Motion in the name of Councillor T. Murphy was WITHDRAWN.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

1. Having regard to the Chief Executive’s Draft Development plan which includes an ‘E’ zoning objective, which seeks ‘to provide for economic development and employment’, and Specific Local Objective 131 which seeks ‘to provide for the development of a Neighbourhood Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines we propose the following amendment to Specific Local Objective 131:

 

“131     To provide for the development of a Neighbourhood Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines, with an immediate need for a Phase 1 mixed use development containing up to 6,000 sq.m net retail sales and a Leisure Facility, which will serve the existing retail and leisure needs of the growth areas of Carrickmines, Stepaside and Kiltiernan-Glenamuck. A further 4,000 sq.m net retail sales can be provided as Phase 2 from 2019 (mid-term of Development Plan) to meet the needs of the substantial additional population planned for this area of the County.”

 

*Relates to lands at The Park, Carrickmines (see Figure 1 below), Map 9 and the Specific Local Objectives (No. 131) Section of the Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan.

 

REASONS

 

The subject lands at Carrickmines were designated for District Centre uses by the Elected Members following the two year review of the 2010-2016 County Development Plan. The designation was challenged by the then Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, however following a High Court Judicial Review, Mr. Justice Clarke instructed the Planning Authority to reinstate the District Centre zoning into the adopted Development Plan as originally proposed by the Elected Members, as he considered that the Elected Members had regard to the relevant planning guidelines and policies when putting forward the designation.

 

It is considered appropriate to clarify the extent of retail floorspace that is considered reasonable to meet the existing and future needs of this substantial and rapidly growing residential area and major employment node within the County.

In this regard the proposed Neighbourhood Centre designation for these lands in the Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan is noted. An amendment of the Specific Local Objective, as set out above, to provide for a Phase 1 development of these lands permitting up to 6,000 sq.m net of retail floorspace and a Leisure Facility, and a subsequent Phase 2 development which could proceed in 2019 or thereafter providing an additional 4,000 sq.m net of retail floorspace, is justified, having regard to the following:

 

·    The Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan proposes to omit the District Centre zoning and designation at Carrickmines, which is one of 6 planned or existing District Centre’s in the County in the 2010 Development Plan. It is necessary to ensure that the new Development Plan provides an appropriate quantum of retail floorspace, and supporting leisure facilities, at this location to serve the key growth areas of Carrickmines, Kiltiernan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan, which have an existing residential population of c. 18,000 and a planned population of c. 34,000 (based on current land use zonings);

 

·    The Carrickmines, Kiltiernan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan area is the only large scale residential and employment district in the entire County not served by an existing or planned suitably sized district centre and associated leisure facilities, such as cinemas, to meet local needs. This has resulted in unsustainable outward travel to avail of such facilities elsewhere;

 

·    The subject lands at Carrickmines are located directly adjacent to the Luas line B1 and a proposed Quality Bus Route. The provision of a Neighbourhood Centre designation, with a total retail floorspace cap of 10,000 sq.m, in this location will reduce the need for car based trips out of the area for local retail needs. The integration of residential and employment land uses, retail designations and transportation accords with the guidance set down in the National Spatial Strategy, Regional Planning Guidelines and Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future and the Greater Dublin Area Draft Transport Strategy 2011-2030 2030 vision;

·    It is noted that The Park, Carrickmines already provides employment for c. 1,400 people. Based on the existing land use zonings it is projected that employment generating uses in this area of the County could provide in the order of 10,000 jobs in the longer term, as there is c. 94 acres (38 ha) of employment zoned land adjoining The Park, Carrickmines, in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Neighbourhood Centre site; This proposal seeks to actively support and encourage the development of these Employment zoned lands and aid job creation, by having appropriate scale retail and leisure facilities in place locally for existing and future residents and workers alike.

·    Carrickmines is not included as a district centre in the GDA Retail Strategy 2008. This is because the GDA Retail Strategy was published in 2008 and therefore preceded the designation of Carrickmines as a District Centre in the 2010 County Development Plan. Thus, it would not be possible for Carrickmines to be listed in a document which pre-dates its designation by several years. We also note that the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 is now out of date and was due for revision in 2014. The Strategy has therefore not yet been updated to reflect the designation of Carrickmines as a District Centre in the current Development Plan. It is and has been common practice in all Dublin Local Authorities, to designate District Centre sites, which thereafter get included into the next review of the GDA Retail Strategy – and not the other way around;

·    Importantly, Section 6.19 of the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 places importance on the designation of additional retail centres of an appropriate scale in Development Plans where significant new population is planned and specifically states the following:

 

“It is important where large areas of new housing are planned that new retail centres are provided in tandem with the housing at a scale appropriate to meeting the regular convenience and lower order comparison shopping needs of these new communities. In the interests of sustainable development, therefore, this Strategy recommends that in considering the provision of new district centres, where they are (a) needed, and (b) appropriate and justified from a co-ordinated planning perspective. In granting such developments cognisance should be taken of existing retail in other areas of the County/City but should not necessarily be restricted on the basis that a Council already granted a volume of retail in those other areas in excess of what is proposed as needed in this Strategy, where overall patterns of sustainable travel and community viability are accentuated”. 

 

·     Section 6.12 of the GDA Retail Strategy states that ‘it is up to the individual planning authorities in their retail strategies to determine the designation of town and/or district centres based on sound sustainable planning principles’. It is important to note that the centres listed in the Retail Hierarchy in the 2008 GDA Retail Strategy are specifically stated as not being a definitive list;

·    The 2010 Development Plan addresses this need and ensured compliance with the GDA Retail Strategy by designating Carrickmines as District Centre. In the absence of a District Centre to serve this area it is important to ensure adequate neighbourhood centre facilities are provided. The removal of the District Centre designation at Carrickmines would render the new County Development Plan 2016-2022 inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy in the absence of adequate retail and leisure facilities to serve the population of the area;

·    Therefore the proposed Neighbourhood Centre designation at Carrickmines in the new County Development Plan would help ensure consistency with the guidance set out in GDA Retail Strategy 2008 in respect to substantial existing and planned new housing and employment areas, provided it is of sufficient scale;

·    The Regional Planning Guidelines (RPG’s) recommend that retail centres should be provided / built-up at public transport nodes and Strategic Recommendation ‘ER14’ seeks to direct new retail floor space into areas with significant population bases and those centres selected for additional population growth;

·     The subject land at Carrickmines, where the proposed Neighbourhood Centre of up to 10,000 sq.m is to be provided under this motion, is situated adjacent to Ballyogan Wood Luas Stop and high quality existing and proposed public bus transport. It is located centrally within an expanding residential and employment area of the County, which contains the three growth areas of Carrickmines, Kilternan-Glenamuck and Stepaside- Ballyogan. Without the designation of a Neighbourhood Centre of sufficient scale at Carrickmines the Planning Authority would be failing to provide for the shopping needs of this area of the County in accordance with the recommendations of the RPG’s;

·    The proposed designation also complies with the RPG’s which recommend that an integrated approach is taken to settlement, employment and transport policy. This approach is also consistent with the guidance set down in the Retail Planning Guidelines which recommend a plan-led approach and the integration of retail with residential and employment land-uses, particularly in proximity to public transport infrastructure;

 

·     The latest CSO Retail Sales Index figures (August 2014) indicates that retail sales volumes, excluding the motor trade (which is the relevant consideration in respect to existing and new retail centres), have returned to significant growth. An increase of more than 5% in the volume of retail sales has been observed from the beginning of 2013. The volume of sales in the Department Store category has increased by 4.3% in 2014, an increase of 4% is observed in the Clothing, Footwear and Textiles category and 3.3% in the Food Business in 2014. It is apparent that the national economy and retail expenditure have returned to strong growth, with projections indicating that growth will continue in 2015 and beyond. This further demonstrates the appropriateness of the objective set out in this motion for Carrickmines;

·    In the absence of the wording proposed in this motion the new Draft County Development Plan would be inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022;

·    The proposed Neighbourhood Centre of 10,000 sq.m net retail sales and incorporating leisure facilities will address the reasons for refusal attached to the decision of An Bord Pleanála, under Register Reference D12A/0163, ABP Ref.: PL06D.240869, to refuse planning permission in April 2013 for a large district centre type development, on the District Centre zoned site;

 

·    The reasons for refusal primarily related to the scale of commercial development and the prematurity of the scale of retailing set out in that application pending the delivery of further housing in proximity to the site. The Board’s Inspector advised that a centre of a similar scale to the 2007 permission on the site (which included 5,000 sq.m net retail sales, 1,852 sq.m retail services and ancillary foodcourt, restaurant, financial services, gymnasium and kiosk uses) would be appropriate in the short term. By re-designating the site as a Neighbourhood Centre with a net retail floorspace cap of 10,000 sq.m, with 6,000 sq.m to be delivered in the short term, in comparison to the 25,000 sq.m cap in the current Plan for the District Centre, the issue of the scale of development proposed will be fully addressed;

 

·     Planning permission was previously granted by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council for a substantial mixed use development, including neighbourhood centre uses, (Reg. Ref.: D07A/0936), on the subject lands at The Park, Carrickmines in April 2008. The quantum of retail floorspace permitted in this scheme was c. 5,000 sq.m net retail sales and 1,852 sq.m of retail services, as part of a mixed use neighbourhood centre development which had a gross floor area of 83,900 sq.m comprising of 331 no. residential units, 20,783 sq.m of office floorspace, a primary health care facility, 2 no. crèche, foodcourt, restaurants, financial services, gymnasium and kiosks;

 

·     The proposed designation has the potential to generate additional economic activity in the area and create significant additional employment in the short term over and above that currently provided at The Park, Carrickmines. This will be a significant positive impact of the proposed development”.

 

 

149.

NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE - MOTION NO. 83 pdf icon PDF 35 KB

It was proposed by Councillor N. Richmond and AGREED to defer consideration of Motion No. 83 until the meeting of the County Council scheduled for Thursday 12th February, 2015 to provide Councillors with the opportunity to consider the Chief Executive’s report on the motion which had only been circulated to Members today.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

  1. Specific Local Objective 131 which seeks ‘to provide for the development of a Neighbourhood Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines’ should be amended as follows:

 

“131    To provide for the development of a District Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines, with a reduced net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m, which will serve the existing and future retail, service and leisure needs of the key growth areas of Carrickmines, Stepaside-Ballyogan  and Kiltiernan-Glenamuck”

 

*Relates to lands at The Park, Carrickmines (see Figure 1 below) and Map 9 of the Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan. Please note the consequential amendments to the Written Statement set out in Appendix 1.

         

Figure 1: Land Use Zoning Extract with Subject Lands Outlined in Blue

(Details Supplied)

 

REASONS

 

The subject lands at Carrickmines were designated for District Centre uses by the Elected Members following the two year review of the 2010-2016 Development Plan. The designation was challenged by the then Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, however, following a High Court Judicial Review, Mr. Justice Clarke instructed the Planning Authority to reinstate the District Centre zoning into the adopted Development Plan as originally proposed by the Elected Members. The designation of a District Centre at Carrickmines has already been rigorously considered during the current Development Plan preparation process and during the High Court Judicial Review proceedings. The Carrickmines District Centre designation is provided for in the current Development Plan and Core Strategy.

 

The appropriateness of the subject site for a district centre designation was carefully considered in the Judgement of Mr. Justice Clarke in the High Court Judicial Review (Case No. 2010 No. 552 J.R.). The Judgement of Mr. Justice Clarke did not raise any concerns whatsoever about the appropriateness of the subject site for a district centre designation. The judgement required the reincorporation of the Carrickmines District Centre designation in the Development Plan and noted that the elected members had proper regard to the relevant guidelines and had justifiable reasons for designating Carrickmines as a District Centre. Mr. Justice Clarke confirmed that the Development Plan, including the district centre designation at Carrickmines, did provide an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of the County in accordance with Section 10(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2000-2010.

 

The proposed motion seeks to include a site specific objective for a reduced scale of District Centre of up to 15,000 sq.m net retail sales (the current Development Plan contains a cap of 25,000 sq.m net retail sales). It is considered that a site specific District Centre objective is still entirely appropriate at Carrickmines, to meet the existing and future retail, leisure and service needs of this substantial and rapidly growing residential area and major employment node within the County, for the following reasons:

 

  • The Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan proposes to omit the District Centre zoning and designation at Carrickmines, which is one of 6 planned or existing District Centre’s in the County in the 2010 Development Plan. However, it is necessary to ensure that the new Development Plan provides an appropriate quantum of retail floorspace, and supporting leisure facilities, at this location to serve the key growth areas of Carrickmines, Kiltiernan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan, which have an existing residential population of c. 18,000 and a planned population of c. 34,000 (based on current land use zonings). A specific local objective for a district centre at The Park is the most appropriate mechanism to ensure that the retail and leisure needs of this area of the County are met in a sustainable and planned manner;

 

·         The Carrickmines, Kiltiernan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan area is the only large scale residential and employment district in the entire County not served by an existing or planned suitably sized district centre and associated leisure facilities, such as cinemas, to meet local needs. This has resulted in unsustainable & inappropriate outward travel to avail of such facilities elsewhere;

 

·         The subject lands at Carrickmines are located directly adjacent to the Luas line B1 and a proposed Quality Bus Route. The provision of a specific local objective for a District Centre in this location will reduce the need for car based trips out of the area for local retail needs. The integration of residential and employment land uses, retail designations and transportation accords with the guidance set down in the National Spatial Strategy, Regional Planning Guidelines, Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future and the Greater Dublin Area Draft Transport Strategy 2011-2030 2030 vision;

 

·         It is noted that The Park, Carrickmines already provides employment for c. 1,400 people. Based on the existing land use zonings it is projected that employment generating uses in this area of the County could provide in the order of 10,000 jobs in the longer term, as there is c. 94 acres (38 ha) of employment zoned land adjoining The Park, Carrickmines, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands;

 

·         This area of Dun Laoghaire Rathdown is currently only served by small neighbourhood centre retail facilities, which serve a local convenience and service function in the retail hierarchy. The existing and planned population in this area of the County warrants the delivery of district centre scale retail facilities of up to 15,000 sq.m net retail sales over the lifetime of the next Development Plan. The Retail Strategy for the GDA 2008 not only supports but specifically requires the designation of appropriately sized new retail centres where significant new housing has been delivered and is planned, such as at Carrickmines;

 

·         The proposed change in the net retail sales cap from 25,000 sq.m to 15,000 sq.m at Carrickmines represents a reduction of some 40% from the current Development Plan designation. This represents a significant compromise and renders Carrickmines with the lowest net retail sales cap of any District Centre in the County, notwithstanding the very significant existing and planned population in the area;

 

·         Carrickmines is not included as a district centre in the GDA Retail Strategy 2008. This is because the GDA Retail Strategy was published in 2008 and therefore preceded the designation of Carrickmines as a District Centre in the 2010 County Development Plan. Thus, it would not be possible for Carrickmines to be listed in a document which pre-dates its designation by several years. We also note that the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 is now out of date and was due for revision in 2014. The Strategy has therefore not yet been updated to reflect the designation of Carrickmines as a District Centre in the current Development Plan.  It is and has been common practice in all Dublin Local Authorities, to designate District Centre sites, which thereafter get included into the next review of the GDA Retail Strategy – and not the other way around;

 

·         Importantly, Section 6.19 of the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 places importance on the designation of additional retail centres of an appropriate scale in Development Plans where significant new population is planned and specifically states the following:

 

“It is important where large areas of new housing are planned that new retail centres are provided in tandem with the housing at a scale appropriate to meeting the regular convenience and lower order comparison shopping needs of these new communities. In the interests of sustainable development, therefore, this Strategy recommends that in considering the provision of new district centres, where they are (a) needed, and (b) appropriate and justified from a co-ordinated planning perspective. In granting such developments cognisance should be taken of existing retail in other areas of the County/City but should not necessarily be restricted on the basis that a Council already granted a volume of retail in those other areas in excess of what is proposed as needed in this Strategy, where overall patterns of sustainable travel and community viability are accentuated.”;

 

·         Section 6.12 of the GDA Retail Strategy states that ‘it is up to the individual planning authorities in their retail strategies to determine the designation of town and/or district centres based on sound sustainable planning principles’.

 

·         The 2010 Development Plan addressed this need and ensured compliance with the GDA Retail Strategy by designating Carrickmines as District Centre. It is important to note that the centres listed in the Retail Hierarchy in the 2008 GDA Retail Strategy are specifically stated as not being a definitive list and the relevant table omits a number of existing district centres in other Local Authorities within the GDA. The inclusion of specific local objective for a District Centre (up to 15,000 sq.m net retail sales) at Carrickmines is fully consistent with the policy recommendations of the GDA Retail Strategy in respect to the designation of new retail centres in Development Plans;

 

·         In the absence of a District Centre to serve this area the new County Development Plan would be inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 as this large area of substantial existing and planned new housing and employment would be left without a planned retail centre of an appropriate scale to meet the regular convenience, lower order comparison shopping and leisure needs of these new communities as required by the GDA Retail Strategy;

 

·         The Regional Planning Guidelines (RPG’s) recommend that district / town centres should be provided / built-up at public transport nodes and Strategic Recommendation ‘ER1 seeks to direct new retail floor space into areas with significant population bases and those centres selected for additional population growth;

 

  • The subject lands at Carrickmines are situated adjacent to Ballyogan Wood Luas Stop and high quality existing and proposed public bus transport. It is located centrally within an expanding residential and employment area of the County, which contains the three growth areas of Carrickmines, Kilternan-Glenamuck and Stepaside- Ballyogan. Without a specific local objective for a District Centre at Carrickmines the Planning Authority would be failing to provide for the shopping, leisure and service needs of this area of the County in accordance with the recommendations of the RPG’s;

 

  • The proposed designation also complies with the RPG’s which recommend that an integrated approach is taken to settlement, employment and transport policy. This approach is also consistent with the guidance set down in the Retail Planning Guidelines which recommend a plan-led approach and the integration of retail with residential and employment land-uses, particularly in proximity to public transport infrastructure;

 

·         The latest CSO Retail Sales Index figures (August 2014) indicates that retail sales volumes, excluding the motor trade, have returned to significant growth. An increase of more than 5% in the volume of retail sales has been observed from the beginning of 2013. The volume of sales in the Department Store category has increased by 4.3% in 2014, an increase of 4% is observed in the Clothing, Footwear and Textiles category and 3.3% in the Food Business in 2014. It is apparent that the national economy and retail expenditure have returned to strong growth, with projections indicating that growth will continue in 2015 and beyond. This further demonstrates the need for district centre scale shopping and leisure facilities at Carrickmines;

 

·         In the absence of the wording proposed in this motion the new Draft County Development Plan would be inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022;

 

·         Any future planning application for a District Centre type development on the subject lands would have to address the reasons for refusal attached to the decision of An Bord Pleanála, under Register Reference D12A/0163, ABP Ref.: PL06D.240869. The reasons for refusal primarily related to the scale of commercial development and the prematurity of the scale of retailing set out in that application pending the delivery of further housing in proximity to the site. The Board’s Inspector advised that a centre of a similar scale to the 2007 permission on the site (which included 5,000 sq.m net retail sales, 1,852 sq.m retail services and ancillary foodcourt, restaurant, financial services, gymnasium and kiosk uses) would be appropriate in the short term, pending further development – which is now commencing again;

 

·         The reasons for refusal would be addressed through a phased development of district centre uses on the subject lands and by reducing the net retail sales cap from 25,000 sq.m, as provided in the current Development Plan, to 15,000 sq.m. The introduction of a significant residential use on the site and the delivery of the significant additional residential and employment development planned in this area of the County over the coming years, would also help address the Board’s concerns in respect to appropriate scale and prematurity pending further housing being delivered in the area;

 

·         Cherrywood Town Centre is a Level 3 District Centre in the County Development Plan. The approved Planning Scheme for Cherrywood SDZ permits Cherrywood Town Centre to cater for between 22,000 to 27,000 sq.m of net retail sales floorspace. As recognised by the Planning Authority during the preparation of the Planning Scheme this floorspace has been designated to service the needs of a maximum new resident population of c. 20,795 persons and a projected employment population of 17,500 persons. Cherrywood Town Centre is not being provided to service the shopping and leisure needs of the people living in Carrickmines, Kilternan, Glenamuck and Stepaside etc., but only the Cherrywood SDZ area;

 

·         By comparison the key growth areas at Carrickmines, Kilternan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan has an existing / planned population of c. 34,000 persons and a projected employment population of c. 12,000, and are currently not served by any District Centre;

 

·         Thus, the proposed Cherrywood town/district centre, as clarified in the Planning Scheme, is to be self-sufficient i.e. the retail floorspace within the SDZ area will be supported by the proposed population of the SDZ area and future employees of the area. Cherrywood town centre will be of a significantly greater scale than any future district centre proposals at Carrickmines; 

 

·         Existing population and retail expenditure figures for the key growth areas, which the District Centre at Carrickmines would serve, demonstrate that there is demand for c. 15,000 sq.m of net retail floorspace over the Development Plan period based on a conservative growth scenario;

 

·         If this area of the County did not contain a District Centre designation in the new Development Plan, to serve existing and planned residential and employment population, it would be the only substantial urban area in the Country without a district or town centre to meet its retail, service and leisure needs;

 

·         The proposed specific local objective for a district centre in this location has the potential to generate much needed additional economic activity in the area and create significant additional employment in the short term over and above that currently provided at The Park, Carrickmines. It isestimated that the Carrickmines District Centre itself would create 500 new jobs for Dun Laoghaire Rathdown. In addition, the building of thebuilding of these retail and leisure facilities would greatly help to stimulate the development of the adjoining 94 acres of Employment zoned lands, which have the potential to create a further 10,000 new jobs for DLR County in the medium term. This will be a significant positive impact of the proposed development.

 

Appendix 1

 

Consequential Amendments to the Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan

 

  • Chapter 3, Table 3.2.2.3- Include Carrickmines as a District Centre with a net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m. Omit reference to Carrickmines as a new Neighbourhood Centre.

·          

Chapter 3, Policy RET5: District Centres- Include reference to the specific local objective to provide a District Centre at Carrickmines with a net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m.

 

  • Chapter 3, Specific Objectives- Include reference to Carrickmines as a District Centre with a net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m”.

 

Report:

 

The Chief Executive does not agree with this Motion.

 

The following is a summary of the key reasons why the Chief Executive does not agree with this motion.  The detailed report should also be read by Councillors when considering this motion.

 

Summary of reasons

  • The Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area (GDA) 2010-2022 sets out a settlement strategy for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County which does not include Carrickmines as a District Centre or a Large Growth Town II. Section 27 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) requires that a planning authority shall ensure when making a development plan, that the plan is consistent with any regional planning guidelines in force for its area. This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not consistent with the Regional Planning Guidelines.
  • The Retail Planning Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued in April 2012 by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government state that “To ensure proper planning and sustainable retail development and activity must follow the settlement hierarchy of the State, including the various Gateway and Hub town locations indentified in the NSS 2002-2020 the Regional Planning Guidelines and the Core Strategies of Development Plans.” This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not in accordance with the policy set out in the Retail Planning Guidelines.  Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) provides that the Minister may, at any time, issue guidelines to planning authorities regarding any of their functions under this Act and planning authorities shall have regard to those guidelines in the performance of their functions. If the motion is passed the Council will have to append a statement in accordance with Section 28 of the Act outlining the reasons for forming the opinion that it is not possible to comply with the guidelines and why the objectives and policies of the Minister have not been implemented.

 

·         It would be contrary to the Retail Hierarchy set out in the GDA Retail Strategy 2008-2016, which does not identify Carrickmines as a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

  • It would be contrary to National Roads policy as set out in Smarter Travel - A Sustainable Transport Future (2009-2020) and Spatial Planning and National Roads, Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2012) as these advise against large retail centres located adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads/motorways as such centres can lead to an inefficient use of costly infrastructure and may undermine the regional/national transport role of the roads and lead to unsustainable modes of travel. Section 28 of the Act also applies in respect of these Guidelines.

 

  • It would undermine the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Retail Hierarchy given the proximity of the District Centre to the approved Town Centre in the Cherrywood SDZ. It would also undermine the designated County and Regional role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town Centre.

 

  • It is further considered that the provision of a District Centre at Carrickmines would have an adverse retail impact on the existing Neighbourhood Centre in Leopardstown Valley and the proposed Neighbourhood Centres in Kiltiernan and Cherrywood

 

  • In the context of the nearest significant residential clusters, it is considered that the site is in a peripheral location relative to these. Its main locational characteristic is its proximity to the M50 Carrickmines Junction. These features would not encourage sustainable modes of travel.

 

  • A recent planning application for a proposed District Centre development on the site was refused permission by Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and An Bord Pleanala on appeal. That planning application, in part, proposed a net retail sales area of 11,875 , which is significantly less than the net retail sales cap of 15,000 proposed in this Motion.

 

  • It is further considered that the combination of (a) the existing uses/floorspace at ‘The Park’ and (b) the District Centre status proposed in this Motion, would provide the potential for ‘The Park’ to grow to a size that would be akin to or surpass a Major Town Centre.

 

 

Detailed Report

The overall thrust of Chapter 3.2: Retail and Major Town Centres of the Chief Executive’s Draft County Development Plan (CDP) is that a continued cautionary approach should be adopted to retailing and retail floorspace for the duration of the Plan – particularly in relation to the potential adverse consequences of oversupply in the County.

 

In the Chief Executive’s Draft Plan the site is zoned ‘E’ “To provide for economic development and employment”, with a specific local objective “To provide for the development of a Neighbourhood Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines”. It is considered that this is the appropriate planning zoning and designation for the site.

 

1.         Regional Planning and Retail Strategy

 

The Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area (GDA) 2010-2022 provide the planning framework for the development of the Greater Dublin Area. They were issued in June 2010.

 

These Regional Planning Guidelines (RPGs) set out the Settlement Hierarchy and the Retail Hierarchy for the GDA which is intended to guide and inform the various retail policies and objectives of the component Development Plans within the Greater Dublin Area. The hierarchy is as follows:

 

Level 1 Centre: Metropolitan Centre, Dublin City Centre

Level 2 Major Town Centres: Dún Laoghaire &Dundrum

Level 3 Town & District Centres: Stillorgan, Blackrock, Nutgrove, Cornelscourt and Cherrywood

Level 4 Neighbourhood& Local Centres

Level 5 Corner shops & small villages

 

The RPGs also set out the settlement strategy for the GDA. Carrickmines is not listed as an identified growth area in that settlement hierarchy.

 

The retail hierarchy in the RPGs is influenced by theGreater Dublin Area (GDA) Retail Strategy 2008-2016. The GDA Retail Strategy sets out the retail hierarchy for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown as follows:

 

Level 2 Major Town Centre – Dún Laoghaire and Dundrum;

Level 3 District Centres– Blackrock, Stillorgan, Nutgrove, Cornelscourt and Cherrywood;

Level 4 Neighbourhood Centres– serving both established residential neighbourhoods and new neighbourhood centres focused on areas subject to planned population growth.

 

Both the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA and the GDA Retail Strategy influence and inform the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown retail hierarchy as set out in Table 3.2.1 of the Chief Executive’s Draft CDP. The GDA Retail Strategy cautions that there is a limited quantitative case to be put forward for the provision of new centres outside of those planned in the RPGs and the Chief Executive’s Draft CDP reflects that position.

 

In April 2014, a pre-draft submission to the 2016-2022 County Development Plan was received from the Dublin Regional Planning Authority. The Regional Planning Officer in this submission stated that the County Development Plan retail strategy “should be consistent with the clear retail hierarchy for the GDA identified in the RPGs”.

 

This Motion would be contrary to the express advice of the Dublin Regional Planning Authority as Carrickmines is not included as a District Centre in the Regional Planning Guidelines or the GDA Retail Strategy. If the Regional Planning Authority were considering including Carrickmines as a District Centre in a review or update of Regional guidance then this would have been an appropriate time to flag this to Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council. Section 27 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) requires that a planning authority shall ensure when making a development plan, that the plan is consistent with any regional planning guidelines in force for its area. This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not consistent with the Regional Planning Guidelines.

 

The Retail Planning Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued in April 2012 by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government state that “To ensure proper planning and sustainable retail development and activity must follow the settlement hierarchy of the State, including the various Gateway and Hub town locations indentified in the NSS 2002-2020 the Regional Planning Guidelines and the Core Strategies of Development Plans.” This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not in accordance with the policy set out in the Retail Planning Guidelines.  Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) provides that the Minister may, at any time, issue guidelines to planning authorities regarding any of their functions under this Act and planning authorities shall have regard to those guidelines in the performance of their functions. If the motion is passed the Council will have to append a statement in accordance with Section 28 of the Act outlining the reasons for forming the opinion that it is not possible to comply with the guidelines and why the objectives and policies of the Minister have not been implemented.

 

2.         Retail in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown

 

The Planning Scheme for the Cherrywood Strategic Development Zone was approved by An Bord Pleanala in April 2014. One of the central objectives of the scheme is to promote the development of a fully sustainable mixed-use Town Centre of 22,700-27,000 m² at Cherrywood – in addition to the provision of 3 no. satellite urban villages at Tully, (ranging in size from 2640-4000 m² net), Lehaunstown, (1000-2500 m² net) and Priorsland, (850-1500 m² net). The planned Town Centre is to serve the needs of Cherrywood. The Cherrywood Town Centre is located less than 2.5km from The Park, Carrickmines and is served by the same Luas Extension. Similarly the Priorsland Neighbourhood Centre is only 600 metres from the north-east quadrant of The Park Carrickmines.

 

 

There is also a planned Neighbourhood Centre in Kiliternan, which is located less than 2km from the site referred to in this Motion and an existing Neighbourhood Centre at Leopardstown Valley, which is located less than 1km from the site identified in the Motion.

 

The site in question forms part of the overall ‘The Park’ development scheme at Carrickmines which comprises of four quadrants. The northwest and southwest quadrants are already developed and contain two retail warehouse parks and a mixed use commercial building with ground floor retail and restaurant uses and three floors of offices above. In addition the southwest quadrant features a Costa café, a McDonalds restaurant and a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant. The southeast quadrant is partially developed and contains primarily office accommodation and a Power City retail warehouse. The site referred to on this Motion is located in the north eastern quadrant. ‘The Park’ is located to the south of the M50 and south west of Junction 15 Carrickmines Interchange.

 

Policy RET5: District Centres, of the Chief Executive’s Draft CDP seeks the evolution of District Centres from being more than simply shopping centres into “…fully functioning mixed-use, higher density urban centres... accommodating a range of other retail services, leisure facilities and community structures” as well as “…a residential and commercial office component where appropriate.” This Policy seeks to shift the mindset that District Centres are exclusively retail centric. This Policy is already embedded in the current 2010-2016 County Development Plan.

 

Given the location and current physical form of ‘The Park’ and the adjacent motorway network, it is difficult to envisage how the centre proposed in this motion could develop into such a District Centre (described above). The District Centre would be heavily car dependant as it is not an attractive environment for pedestrians or cyclists given the rather hostile roads environment surrounding the subject site.

 

In the context of the nearest significant residential clusters the site is peripheral, and its main locational characteristic is its proximity to the M50 Carrickmines Junction. These features would not encourage sustainable modes of travel. The National Transport Authority and the National Roads Authority have previously raised concerns with regard to the location of the proposed District Centre adjacent to a key motorway interchange as this may result in the unsustainable use of the National road network by local traffic accessing the centre.

 

Given the proximity of the District Centre to the approved Town Centre in the Cherrywood SDZ, it would undermine the designated County and Regional role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town Centre. It is further considered that the provision of a District Centre at Carrickmines would have an adverse retail impact on the existing Neighbourhood Centre in Leopardstown Valley and the proposed Neighbourhood Centre in Kiltiernan.

 

 

3.         Planning History

 

In April 2013 An Bord Pleanala refused planning permission, under D12A/0163, for a mixed-use District Centre development at the Park, Carrickmines, with a net retail floorspace of 11,875 m². This Motion proposes a net retail floorspace of 15,000 m², which is larger than that proposed in the unsuccessful application refused permission by An Bord Pleanala.

 

The Inspectors report stated, inter alia:

 

Start of Excerpt from the Bord’s report

 

6.2 Compatibility with Planning Policy and Guidelines

 

National Transportation Policy and Guidelines

National roads policy is set out in the Policy Statement on Development Management & Access to National Roads, 2006, Smarter Travel - A Sustainable Transport Future, 2009-2020 and Spatial Planning and National Roads, Guidelines for Planning Authorities, 2012.

 

These documents advocate the use of established Town and District Centres as the preferred locations for new retail developments. There is a presumption against large retail centres located adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads/motorways as such centres can lead to an inefficient use of costly infrastructure and may undermine the regional/national transport role of the roads.

 

In particular the Spatial Planning and National Roads, Guidelines 2012 states that the primary purpose of the national road network is to provide strategic transport links between the main centres of population and employment, including key international gateways and to provide access between all regions and that any local transport function of a national road must continue to be secondary to the role of these national roads in catering for strategic traffic.

 

The proposed district centre would be located in close proximity to Junction 15 of the M50. The existing retail warehouse component of The Park development already functions as the main location in the county for the purchase of durable goods and it is highly likely that the proposed retail and leisure component will attract consumers who will use the M50 to access the development. In this regard the proposed district centre would undermine national policy for the use of the national road and motorway network for strategic traffic by catering for local traffic.

 

Regional Planning Policy and Guidelines

 

Regional Planning Guidelines:

The Regional Planning Guidelines sets out a Retail Hierarchy in Figure 3 which identifies Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum as Level 2 Major Town Centres and Cherrywood as a Level 3 Town or District Centre along with Stillorgan, Blackrock, Nutgrove and Cornelscourt. Carrickmines is not listed as either a Level 2 Major Town Centre or a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

The Guidelines also set out a Settlement Hierarchy in Table 8 which identifies Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum as Metropolitan Consolidation Towns, Wicklow as a Large Growth Town I and Cherrywood as a Large Growth Town II. Carrickmines is not listed as either a Metropolitan Consolidation Town or as a Large Growth Town I or II.

 

Retail Strategy for the GDA:

The Retail Strategy for the GDA 2008-2016adopts a Retail Hierarchy which respects the different needs of the GDA Metropolitan and Hinterland Areas as defined in the Regional Planning Guidelines 2010-2016 for the GDA.

 

Conclusions:

• The proposed district centre would be contrary to the Settlement Hierarchy set out in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022 which does not identify Carrickmines as a Large Growth Town II.

 

• The proposed district centre would be contrary to the Retail Hierarchy set out in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022 which does not identify Carrickmines as a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

• The proposed district centre would be contrary to the Retail Hierarchy set out in the Retail Strategy for the GDA, 2008-2016 Hierarchy which does not identify Carrickmines as a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

• The proposed district centre would undermine the Settlement and Retail Hierarchies and the designated role of Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum as Level 2Town Centres and Metropolitan Consolidation towns (set out in the above regional policy documents) to serve the needs of the County.

 

• The proposed district centre would undermine the designated role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town or District Centre in the Retail Hierarchy and as a Large Growth Town II in the Settlement Hierarchy (in the regional policy documents) to serve the needs of the planned population.

 

• The proposed district centre would undermine the designated role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town or District Centre in the Retail Hierarchy and as a Large Growth Town II in the Settlement Hierarchy (in the regional policy documents) to serve the needs of the planned population.

 

6.3 Retail Impact

 

Retail Impact Assessment

 

Retail catchment:

Both the Retail Impact Assessment and the revised Retail Impact Statement identified a catchment for the proposed District Centre within which the existing and projected population and expenditure levels were both established and extrapolated. It is interesting to note that the eastern boundary of the catchment was not established along empirical guidelines but was based on the assumption that no-one living on the eastern side of the M50 would drive to the proposed centre. The revised RIS made minor amendments to this assumption. Given that the proposed District Centre has direct access to the M50 motorway via Junction 15 it is highly likely that the proposed development will attract shoppers from a much wider catchment than the usual 5-minute drive time or indeed an extended 10 to 15 minute drive time along the M50.

 

Cumulative impact:

Concerns have been raised in relation to the status of the proposed district centre. It has been submitted that the combined floorspace of the proposed District Centre and the existing retail warehouses and restaurants located within the overall park development would equate to the scale of a regional shopping centre.

 

The proposed development would also comprise a substantial leisure component including restaurants and leisure uses, including a gym, multiplex cinema and bowling alley, in addition to the retail and financial services floorspace. The scale of the proposed development, taking in combination with the existing retail warehouse and restaurant floorspace, is excessive for the local area that it would serve. Given its close proximity to the M50 corridor the proposed centre would attract shoppers and leisure seekers from a much wider area. This would in turn draw some trade from the existing Level 2 towns in the County and undermine the existing Level 3towns/district centres in the southern half of the County and the nearby neighbourhood centres.

 

Conclusions:

• Having regard to all of the above I am not convinced that the proposed development would serve an entirely local need or that there would be sufficient capacity within the existing and future catchment population to accommodate the proposed centre. The proposed development would draw trade from other existing centres in the County by virtue of the combination of the existing and proposed range of retail and leisure uses along with the proximity of the proposed centre to the M50. The proposed development would, therefore, adversely affect the vitality and viability of other town, district and neighbourhood centres in the area.

 

6.4 Traffic, Movement and Accessibility.

 

Retail catchment:

The catchment defined by the RIS assumes that the proposed retail uses will serve mainly local needs and that there will be sufficient population and expenditure growth within the catchment to sustain these uses. The surrounding area is characterised by low to medium density residential developments and there are a limited number of sites within the surrounding area that will contribute to future population growth. It is likely, therefore that the success of the proposed District Centre will be dependent on expenditure which originates outside the catchment.

 

Impact on national roads:

Having regard to the proximity of the site to the M50 combined with the good internal road network, the proposed development would impact on the wider road network and the potential impact on the M50 in general and Junction 15 in particular has not been adequately assessed. It should also be noted that there is a national and regional policy presumption against the location of new large scale retail developments adjacent to or in close proximity to planned or improved major roads and additional retail floorspace should be located within existing town centres.

 

Public transport:

The appeal site is located approximately 0.5km from the LUAS and Dublin Bus stop at Ballyogan Road and in close proximity to a Quality Bus Corridor. Although the area is reasonably well served by public transport, the adjoining low to medium density residential areas would not comprise a sufficient population to sustain the quantum of floorspace proposed and the origins of the future workforce is not clear. All of this would indicate that the future success of the proposal could be car dependent…….”.

 

The Inspector then recommended refusing planning permission for the proposed District Centre development for three reasons.

 

The Bord refused planning permission for the proposed District Centre development for two reasons as follows:

 

“REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

 

Having regard to the provisions of:

 

• the National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020;

 

• the Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Retail Planning, 2012;

 

• the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010-2022;

 

• the Retail Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2008-2016;

 

• the Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2012;

 

• Smarter Travel, A Sustainable Transport Future, A New Transport Policy for Ireland 2009-2020;

 

• A Platform for Change, 2009-2016, The Dublin Transport Office; and

 

• the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2010-2016;

 

and to the nature, form, scale, design and location of the proposed development, planning permission is hereby refused for the following reasons:

 

1. Having regard to the location and scale of retail floorspace proposed, it is considered that the proposed development, in addition to the existing level of retail activity in the vicinity, would conflict with the Retail Hierarchy for the Greater Dublin Area as set out in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010-2022 and the Retail Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2008-2016, neither of which identifies Carrickmines as a Level 3 District Centre. Furthermore, the proposed development would undermine the Retail Hierarchy for the Greater Dublin Area and the designated role of Dún Laoghaire and Dundrum as level 2 Town Centres to serve the needs of the County. Accordingly, notwithstanding the District Centre zoning objective for the site as set out in the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2010-2016, it is considered that the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

 

2. Having regard to the location of the proposed development on the periphery of its catchment area, the low population within walking or cycling distance of the proposed District Centre and its close proximity to the M50 Motorway, it is considered that taken in combination with the mix of existing and proposed uses, the proposed development would generate a high level of car dependency. This outcome would-be contrary to national and local transportation policy, as set out in,’ Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future 2009-2020’ and Policy T2 of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Development Plan 2010-2016, which seek to affect modal shift from private cars to more sustainable modes of transport and travel. Taking into consideration the constrained nature of the M50 junctions serving the site together with existing traffic levels, as highlighted by the National Roads Authority and the substantial additional traffic volumes likely to be generated by almost 60,000 square metres of additional developmental this location, it is considered that the proposed development would give rise to a high level of car dependency, promote unsustainable use of the local road network, adversely affect the operational safety and efficiency of the national road network and undermine the benefits of public investment same. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.”

 

 

End of Excerpt from the Bord’s report

 

 

4.         Conclusion

 

Having regard to the Retail Hierarchy for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown as advised in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022 and  the GDA Retail Strategy 2008-2016, the recent planning history for the site (D12A/0163), and in light of already committed retail cores at Cherrywood, Priorsland and Kiltiernan and the existing Neighbourhood Centre at Leopardstown Valley, it is considered there is no objective or reasoned rationale to change the status of The Park, Carrickmines from Neighbourhood Centre to District Centre with a reduced net retail sales cap of 15,000 m².

 

For clarity, in relation to the Judicial Review Proceedings in 2010, the judgment of the High Court was directed solely at the lawfulness of the Direction of the Minister issued under section 31(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The Court expressed no view on what might be described as “the planning merits” of the case; the court had no function in this regard.

 

 

Contact: K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive

 

 

150.

NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE - MOTION NO. 84 pdf icon PDF 147 KB

Additional documents:

It was proposed by Councillor J. Madigan and AGREED to defer consideration of Motion No. 84 until the meeting of the County Council scheduled for Thursday 12th February, 2015 to provide Councillors with the opportunity to consider the Chief Executive’s report on the motion which had only been circulated to Members today.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

  1. Specific Local Objective 131 which seeks ‘to provide for the development of a Neighbourhood Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines’ should be amended as follows:

 

“131    To provide for the development of a District Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines, with a reduced net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m, which will serve the existing and future retail, service and leisure needs of the key growth areas of Carrickmines, Stepaside-Ballyogan  and Kiltiernan-Glenamuck”

 

*Relates to lands at The Park, Carrickmines (see Figure 1 below) and Map 9 of the Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan. Please note the consequential amendments to the Written Statement set out in Appendix 1.

         

Figure 1: Land Use Zoning Extract with Subject Lands Outlined in Blue

(Details supplied)

 

REASONS

 

The subject lands at Carrickmines were designated for District Centre uses by the Elected Members following the two year review of the 2010-2016 Development Plan. The designation was challenged by the then Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, however, following a High Court Judicial Review, Mr. Justice Clarke instructed the Planning Authority to reinstate the District Centre zoning into the adopted Development Plan as originally proposed by the Elected Members. The designation of a District Centre at Carrickmines has already been rigorously considered during the current Development Plan preparation process and during the High Court Judicial Review proceedings. The Carrickmines District Centre designation is provided for in the current Development Plan and Core Strategy.

 

The appropriateness of the subject site for a district centre designation was carefully considered in the Judgement of Mr. Justice Clarke in the High Court Judicial Review (Case No. 2010 No. 552 J.R.). The Judgement of Mr. Justice Clarke did not raise any concerns whatsoever about the appropriateness of the subject site for a district centre designation. The judgement required the reincorporation of the Carrickmines District Centre designation in the Development Plan and noted that the elected members had proper regard to the relevant guidelines and had justifiable reasons for designating Carrickmines as a District Centre. Mr. Justice Clarke confirmed that the Development Plan, including the district centre designation at Carrickmines, did provide an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of the County in accordance with Section 10(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2000-2010.

 

The proposed motion seeks to include a site specific objective for a reduced scale of District Centre of up to 15,000 sq.m net retail sales (the current Development Plan contains a cap of 25,000 sq.m net retail sales). It is considered that a site specific District Centre objective is still entirely appropriate at Carrickmines, to meet the existing and future retail, leisure and service needs of this substantial and rapidly growing residential area and major employment node within the County, for the following reasons:

 

  • The Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan proposes to omit the District Centre zoning and designation at Carrickmines, which is one of 6 planned or existing District Centre’s in the County in the 2010 Development Plan. However, it is necessary to ensure that the new Development Plan provides an appropriate quantum of retail floorspace, and supporting leisure facilities, at this location to serve the key growth areas of Carrickmines, Kiltiernan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan, which have an existing residential population of c. 18,000 and a planned population of c. 34,000 (based on current land use zonings). A specific local objective for a district centre at The Park is the most appropriate mechanism to ensure that the retail and leisure needs of this area of the County are met in a sustainable and planned manner;

 

·         The Carrickmines, Kiltiernan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan area is the only large scale residential and employment district in the entire County not served by an existing or planned suitably sized district centre and associated leisure facilities, such as cinemas, to meet local needs. This has resulted in unsustainable & inappropriate outward travel to avail of such facilities elsewhere;

 

  • The subject lands at Carrickmines are located directly adjacent to the Luas line B1 and a proposed Quality Bus Route. The provision of a specific local objective for a District Centre in this location will reduce the need for car based trips out of the area for local retail needs. The integration of residential and employment land uses, retail designations and transportation accords with the guidance set down in the National Spatial Strategy, Regional Planning Guidelines, Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future and the Greater Dublin Area Draft Transport Strategy 2011-2030 2030 vision;

 

·         It is noted that The Park, Carrickmines already provides employment for c. 1,400 people. Based on the existing land use zonings it is projected that employment generating uses in this area of the County could provide in the order of 10,000 jobs in the longer term, as there is c. 94 acres (38 ha) of employment zoned land adjoining The Park, Carrickmines, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands;

 

·         This area of Dun Laoghaire Rathdown is currently only served by small neighbourhood centre retail facilities, which serve a local convenience and service function in the retail hierarchy. The existing and planned population in this area of the County warrants the delivery of district centre scale retail facilities of up to 15,000 sq.m net retail sales over the lifetime of the next Development Plan. The Retail Strategy for the GDA 2008 not only supports but specifically requires the designation of appropriately sized new retail centres where significant new housing has been delivered and is planned, such as at Carrickmines;

·         The proposed change in the net retail sales cap from 25,000 sq.m to 15,000 sq.m at Carrickmines represents a reduction of some 40% from the current Development Plan designation. This represents a significant compromise and renders Carrickmines with the lowest net retail sales cap of any District Centre in the County, notwithstanding the very significant existing and planned population in the area;

 

Carrickmines is not included as a district centre in the GDA Retail Strategy 2008. This is because the GDA Retail Strategy was published in 2008 and therefore preceded the designation of Carrickmines as a District Centre in the 2010 County Development Plan. Thus, it would not be possible for Carrickmines to be listed in a document which pre-dates its designation by several years. We also note that the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 is now out of date and was due for revision in 2014. The Strategy has therefore not yet been updated to reflect the designation of Carrickmines as a District Centre in the current Development Plan.  It is and has been common practice in all Dublin Local Authorities, to designate District Centre sites, which thereafter get included into the next review of the GDA Retail Strategy – and not the other way around

 

  • Importantly, Section 6.19 of the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 places importance on the designation of additional retail centres of an appropriate scale in Development Plans where significant new population is planned and specifically states the following:

 

“It is important where large areas of new housing are planned that new retail centres are provided in tandem with the housing at a scale appropriate to meeting the regular convenience and lower order comparison shopping needs of these new communities. In the interests of sustainable development, therefore, this Strategy recommends that in considering the provision of new district centres, where they are (a) needed, and (b) appropriate and justified from a co-ordinated planning perspective. In granting such developments cognisance should be taken of existing retail in other areas of the County/City but should not necessarily be restricted on the basis that a Council already granted a volume of retail in those other areas in excess of what is proposed as needed in this Strategy, where overall patterns of sustainable travel and community viability are accentuated.”;

 

·         Section 6.12 of the GDA Retail Strategy states that ‘it is up to the individual planning authorities in their retail strategies to determine the designation of town and/or district centres based on sound sustainable planning principles’.

 

  • The 2010 Development Plan addressed this need and ensured compliance with the GDA Retail Strategy by designating Carrickmines as District Centre. It is important to note that the centres listed in the Retail Hierarchy in the 2008 GDA Retail Strategy are specifically stated as not being a definitive list and the relevant table omits a number of existing district centres in other Local Authorities within the GDA. The inclusion of specific local objective for a District Centre (up to 15,000 sq.m net retail sales) at Carrickmines is fully consistent with the policy recommendations of the GDA Retail Strategy in respect to the designation of new retail centres in Development Plans;

 

  • In the absence of a District Centre to serve this area the new County Development Plan would be inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 as this large area of substantial existing and planned new housing and employment would be left without a planned retail centre of an appropriate scale to meet the regular convenience, lower order comparison shopping and leisure needs of these new communities as required by the GDA Retail Strategy;

 

  • The Regional Planning Guidelines (RPG’s) recommend that district / town centres should be provided / built-up at public transport nodes and Strategic Recommendation ‘ER14’ seeks to direct new retail floor space into areas with significant population bases and those centres selected for additional population growth;

 

  • The subject lands at Carrickmines are situated adjacent to Ballyogan       Wood
  • Luas Stop and high quality existing and proposed public bus   transport

 

  •  It is located centrally within an expanding residential and employment area of the County, which contains the three growth areas of Carrickmines, Kilternan-Glenamuck and Stepaside- Ballyogan. Without a specific local objective for a District Centre at Carrickmines the Planning Authority would be failing to provide for the shopping, leisure and service needs of this area of the County in accordance with the recommendations of the RPG’s;

 

  • The proposed designation also complies with the RPG’s which recommend that an integrated approach is taken to settlement, employment and transport policy. This approach is also consistent with the guidance set down in the Retail Planning Guidelines which recommend a plan-led approach and the integration of retail with residential and employment land-uses, particularly in proximity to public transport infrastructure;

 

  • The latest CSO Retail Sales Index figures (August 2014) indicates that retail sales volumes, excluding the motor trade, have returned to significant growth. An increase of more than 5% in the volume of retail sales has been observed from the beginning of 2013. The volume of sales in the Department Store category has increased by 4.3% in 2014, an increase of 4% is observed in the Clothing, Footwear and Textiles category and 3.3% in the Food Business in 2014. It is apparent that the national economy and retail expenditure have returned to strong growth, with projections indicating that growth will continue in 2015 and beyond. This further demonstrates the need for district centre scale shopping and leisure facilities at Carrickmines;

 

  • In the absence of the wording proposed in this motion the new Draft County Development Plan would be inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022;

 

·         Any future planning application for a District Centre type development on the subject lands would have to address the reasons for refusal attached to the decision of An Bord Pleanála, under Register Reference D12A/0163, ABP Ref.: PL06D.240869. The reasons for refusal primarily related to the scale of commercial development and the prematurity of the scale of retailing set out in that application pending the delivery Board’s Inspector advised that a centre of a similar scale to the 2007 permission on the site (which included 5,000 sq.m net retail sales, 1,852 sq.m retail services and ancillary foodcourt, restaurant, financial services, gymnasium and kiosk uses) would be appropriate in the short term, pending further development – which is now commencing again;

 

  • The reasons for refusal would be addressed through a phased development of district centre uses on the subject lands and by reducing the net retail sales cap from 25,000 sq.m, as provided in the current Development Plan, to 15,000 sq.m. The introduction of a significant residential use on the site and the delivery of the significant additional residential and employment development of further housing in proximity to the site. The public bus transport. It is located centrally within an expanding residential and employment area of the County, which contains the three growth areas of Carrickmines, Kilternan-Glenamuck and Stepaside- Ballyogan. Without a specific local objective for a District Centre at Carrickmines the Planning Authority would be failing to provide for the shopping, leisure and service needs of this area of the County in accordance with the recommendations of the RPG’s;

 

  • The proposed designation also complies with the RPG’s which recommend that an integrated approach is taken to settlement, employment and transport policy. This approach is also consistent with the guidance set down in the Retail Planning Guidelines which recommend a plan-led approach and the integration of retail with residential and employment land-uses, particularly in proximity to public transport infrastructure;

 

  • The latest CSO Retail Sales Index figures (August 2014) indicates that retail sales volumes, excluding the motor trade, have returned to significant growth. An increase of more than 5% in the volume of retail sales has been observed from the beginning of 2013. The volume of sales in the Department Store category has increased by 4.3% in 2014, an increase of 4% is observed in the Clothing, Footwear and Textiles category and 3.3% in the Food Business in 2014. It is apparent that the national economy and retail expenditure have returned to strong growth, with projections indicating that growth will continue in 2015 and beyond. This further demonstrates the need for district centre scale shopping and leisure facilities at Carrickmines;

 

  • In the absence of the wording proposed in this motion the new Draft County Development Plan would be inconsistent with the GDA Retail Strategy 2008 and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022;

 

  • Any future planning application for a District Centre type development on the subject lands would have to address the reasons for refusal attached to the decision of An Bord Pleanála, under Register Reference D12A/0163, ABP Ref.: PL06D.240869. The reasons for refusal primarily related to the scale of commercial development and the prematurity of the scale of retailing set out in that application pending the delivery Board’s Inspector advised that a centre of a similar scale to the 2007 permission on the site (which included 5,000 sq.m net retail sales, 1,852 sq.m retail services and ancillary foodcourt, restaurant, financial services, gymnasium and kiosk uses) would be appropriate in the short term, pending further development – which is now commencing again;

 

·         The reasons for refusal would be addressed through a phased development of district centre uses on the subject lands and by reducing the net retail sales cap from 25,000 sq.m, as provided in the current Development Plan, to 15,000 sq.m. The introduction of a significant residential use on the site and the delivery of the significant additional residential and employment developmentplanned in this area of the County over the coming years, would also help address the Board’s concerns in respect to appropriate scale and prematurity pending further housing being delivered in the area;

 

  • Cherrywood Town Centre is a Level 3 District Centre in the County Development Plan. The approved Planning Scheme for Cherrywood SDZ permits Cherrywood Town Centre to cater for between 22,000 to 27,000 sq.m of net retail sales floorspace. As recognised by the Planning Authority during the preparation of the Planning Scheme this floorspace has been designated to service the needs of a maximum new resident population of c. 20,795 persons and a projected employment population of 17,500 persons. Cherrywood Town Centre is not being provided to service the shopping and leisure needs of the people living in Carrickmines, Kilternan, Glenamuck and Stepaside etc., but only the Cherrywood SDZ area;

 

·         By comparison the key growth areas at Carrickmines, Kilternan-Glenamuck and Stepaside-Ballyogan has an existing / planned population of c. 34,000 persons and a projected employment population of c. 12,000, and are currently not served by any District Centre;

 

  • Thus, the proposed Cherrywood town/district centre, as clarified in the Planning Scheme, is to be self-sufficient i.e. the retail floorspace within the SDZ area will be supported by the proposed population of the SDZ area and future employees of the area. Cherrywood town centre will be of a significantly greater scale than any future district centre proposals at Carrickmines; 

 

  • Existing population and retail expenditure figures for the key growth areas, which the District Centre at Carrickmines would serve, demonstrate that there is demand for c. 15,000 sq.m of net retail floorspace over the Development Plan period based on a conservative growth scenario;

 

·         If this area of the County did not contain a District Centre designation in the new Development Plan, to serve existing and planned residential and employment population, it would be the only substantial urban area in the Country without a district or town centre to meet its retail, service and leisure needs;

 

·         The proposed specific local objective for a district centre in this location has the potential to generate much needed additional economic activity in the area and create significant additional employment in the short term over and above that currently provided at The Park, Carrickmines. It is estimated that the Carrickmines District Centre itself would create 500 new jobs for Dun Laoghaire Rathdown. In addition, the building of these retail and leisure facilities would greatly help to stimulate the development of the adjoining 94 acres of Employment zoned lands, which have the potential to create a further 10,000 new jobs for DLR County in the medium term. This will be a significant positive impact of the proposed development.

 

Appendix 1

 

Consequential Amendments to the Chief Executive’s Draft Development Plan

 

  • Chapter 3, Table 3.2.2.3- Include Carrickmines as a District Centre with a net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m. Omit reference to Carrickmines as a new Neighbourhood Centre.

·          

Chapter 3, Policy RET5: District Centres- Include reference to the specific local objective to provide a District Centre at Carrickmines with a net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m.

 

  • Chapter 3, Specific Objectives- Include reference to Carrickmines as a District Centre with a net retail sales cap of 15,000 sq.m.

 

Report:

 

The Chief Executive does not agree with this Motion.

 

The following is a summary of the key reasons why the Chief Executive does not agree with this motion.  The detailed report should also be read by Councillors when considering this motion.

 

Summary of reasons

  • The Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area (GDA) 2010-2022 sets out a settlement strategy for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County which does not include Carrickmines as a District Centre or a Large Growth Town II. Section 27 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) requires that a planning authority shall ensure when making a development plan, that the plan is consistent with any regional planning guidelines in force for its area. This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not consistent with the Regional Planning Guidelines.
  • The Retail Planning Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued in April 2012 by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government state that “To ensure proper planning and sustainable retail development and activity must follow the settlement hierarchy of the State, including the various Gateway and Hub town locations indentified in the NSS 2002-2020 the Regional Planning Guidelines and the Core Strategies of Development Plans.” This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not in accordance with the policy set out in the Retail Planning Guidelines.  Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) provides that the Minister may, at any time, issue guidelines to planning authorities regarding any of their functions under this Act and planning authorities shall have regard to those guidelines in the performance of their functions. If the motion is passed the Council will have to append a statement in accordance with Section 28 of the Act outlining the reasons for forming the opinion that it is not possible to comply with the guidelines and why the objectives and policies of the Minister have not been implemented.

 

·         It would be contrary to the Retail Hierarchy set out in the GDA Retail Strategy 2008-2016, which does not identify Carrickmines as a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

  • It would be contrary to National Roads policy as set out in Smarter Travel - A Sustainable Transport Future (2009-2020) and Spatial Planning and National Roads, Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2012) as these advise against large retail centres located adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads/motorways as such centres can lead to an inefficient use of costly infrastructure and may undermine the regional/national transport role of the roads and lead to unsustainable modes of travel. Section 28 of the Act also applies in respect of these Guidelines.

 

  • It would undermine the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Retail Hierarchy given the proximity of the District Centre to the approved Town Centre in the Cherrywood SDZ. It would also undermine the designated County and Regional role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town Centre.

 

  • It is further considered that the provision of a District Centre at Carrickmines would have an adverse retail impact on the existing Neighbourhood Centre in Leopardstown Valley and the proposed Neighbourhood Centres in Kiltiernan and Cherrywood

 

  • In the context of the nearest significant residential clusters, it is considered that the site is in a peripheral location relative to these. Its main locational characteristic is its proximity to the M50 Carrickmines Junction. These features would not encourage sustainable modes of travel.

 

  • A recent planning application for a proposed District Centre development on the site was refused permission by Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and An Bord Pleanala on appeal. That planning application, in part, proposed a net retail sales area of 11,875 , which is significantly less than the net retail sales cap of 15,000 proposed in this Motion.

 

  • It is further considered that the combination of (a) the existing uses/floorspace at ‘The Park’ and (b) the District Centre status proposed in this Motion, would provide the potential for ‘The Park’ to grow to a size that would be akin to or surpass a Major Town Centre.

 

 

Detailed Report

The overall thrust of Chapter 3.2: Retail and Major Town Centres of the Chief Executive’s Draft County Development Plan (CDP) is that a continued cautionary approach should be adopted to retailing and retail floorspace for the duration of the Plan – particularly in relation to the potential adverse consequences of oversupply in the County.

 

In the Chief Executive’s Draft Plan the site is zoned ‘E’ “To provide for economic development and employment”, with a specific local objective “To provide for the development of a Neighbourhood Centre in the north-east ‘quadrant’ of the Park, Carrickmines”. It is considered that this is the appropriate planning zoning and designation for the site.

 

1.         Regional Planning and Retail Strategy

 

The Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area (GDA) 2010-2022 provide the planning framework for the development of the Greater Dublin Area. They were issued in June 2010.

 

These Regional Planning Guidelines (RPGs) set out the Settlement Hierarchy and the Retail Hierarchy for the GDA which is intended to guide and inform the various retail policies and objectives of the component Development Plans within the Greater Dublin Area. The hierarchy is as follows:

 

Level 1 Centre: Metropolitan Centre, Dublin City Centre

Level 2 Major Town Centres: Dún Laoghaire &Dundrum

Level 3 Town & District Centres: Stillorgan, Blackrock, Nutgrove, Cornelscourt and Cherrywood

Level 4 Neighbourhood& Local Centres

Level 5 Corner shops & small villages

 

The RPGs also set out the settlement strategy for the GDA. Carrickmines is not listed as an identified growth area in that settlement hierarchy.

 

The retail hierarchy in the RPGs is influenced by theGreater Dublin Area (GDA) Retail Strategy 2008-2016. The GDA Retail Strategy sets out the retail hierarchy for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown as follows:

 

Level 2 Major Town Centre – Dún Laoghaire and Dundrum;

Level 3 District Centres– Blackrock, Stillorgan, Nutgrove, Cornelscourt and Cherrywood;

Level 4 Neighbourhood Centres– serving both established residential neighbourhoods and new neighbourhood centres focused on areas subject to planned population growth.

 

Both the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA and the GDA Retail Strategy influence and inform the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown retail hierarchy as set out in Table 3.2.1 of the Chief Executive’s Draft CDP. The GDA Retail Strategy cautions that there is a limited quantitative case to be put forward for the provision of new centres outside of those planned in the RPGs and the Chief Executive’s Draft CDP reflects that position.

 

In April 2014, a pre-draft submission to the 2016-2022 County Development Plan was received from the Dublin Regional Planning Authority. The Regional Planning Officer in this submission stated that the County Development Plan retail strategy “should be consistent with the clear retail hierarchy for the GDA identified in the RPGs”.

 

This Motion would be contrary to the express advice of the Dublin Regional Planning Authority as Carrickmines is not included as a District Centre in the Regional Planning Guidelines or the GDA Retail Strategy. If the Regional Planning Authority were considering including Carrickmines as a District Centre in a review or update of Regional guidance then this would have been an appropriate time to flag this to Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council. Section 27 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) requires that a planning authority shall ensure when making a development plan, that the plan is consistent with any regional planning guidelines in force for its area. This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not consistent with the Regional Planning Guidelines.

 

The Retail Planning Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued in April 2012 by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government state that “To ensure proper planning and sustainable retail development and activity must follow the settlement hierarchy of the State, including the various Gateway and Hub town locations indentified in the NSS 2002-2020 the Regional Planning Guidelines and the Core Strategies of Development Plans.” This motion if passed would mean that the draft plan is not in accordance with the policy set out in the Retail Planning Guidelines.  Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) provides that the Minister may, at any time, issue guidelines to planning authorities regarding any of their functions under this Act and planning authorities shall have regard to those guidelines in the performance of their functions. If the motion is passed the Council will have to append a statement in accordance with Section 28 of the Act outlining the reasons for forming the opinion that it is not possible to comply with the guidelines and why the objectives and policies of the Minister have not been implemented.

 

2.         Retail in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown

 

The Planning Scheme for the Cherrywood Strategic Development Zone was approved by An Bord Pleanala in April 2014. One of the central objectives of the scheme is to promote the development of a fully sustainable mixed-use Town Centre of 22,700-27,000 m² at Cherrywood – in addition to the provision of 3 no. satellite urban villages at Tully, (ranging in size from 2640-4000 m² net), Lehaunstown, (1000-2500 m² net) and Priorsland, (850-1500 m² net). The planned Town Centre is to serve the needs of Cherrywood. The Cherrywood Town Centre is located less than 2.5km from The Park, Carrickmines and is served by the same Luas Extension. Similarly the Priorsland Neighbourhood Centre is only 600 metres from the north-east quadrant of The Park Carrickmines.

 

 

There is also a planned Neighbourhood Centre in Kiliternan, which is located less than 2km from the site referred to in this Motion and an existing Neighbourhood Centre at Leopardstown Valley, which is located less than 1km from the site identified in the Motion.

 

The site in question forms part of the overall ‘The Park’ development scheme at Carrickmines which comprises of four quadrants. The northwest and southwest quadrants are already developed and contain two retail warehouse parks and a mixed use commercial building with ground floor retail and restaurant uses and three floors of offices above. In addition the southwest quadrant features a Costa café, a McDonalds restaurant and a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant. The southeast quadrant is partially developed and contains primarily office accommodation and a Power City retail warehouse. The site referred to on this Motion is located in the north eastern quadrant. ‘The Park’ is located to the south of the M50 and south west of Junction 15 Carrickmines Interchange.

 

Policy RET5: District Centres, of the Chief Executive’s Draft CDP seeks the evolution of District Centres from being more than simply shopping centres into “…fully functioning mixed-use, higher density urban centres... accommodating a range of other retail services, leisure facilities and community structures” as well as “…a residential and commercial office component where appropriate.” This Policy seeks to shift the mindset that District Centres are exclusively retail centric. This Policy is already embedded in the current 2010-2016 County Development Plan.

 

Given the location and current physical form of ‘The Park’ and the adjacent motorway network, it is difficult to envisage how the centre proposed in this motion could develop into such a District Centre (described above). The District Centre would be heavily car dependant as it is not an attractive environment for pedestrians or cyclists given the rather hostile roads environment surrounding the subject site.

 

In the context of the nearest significant residential clusters the site is peripheral, and its main locational characteristic is its proximity to the M50 Carrickmines Junction. These features would not encourage sustainable modes of travel. The National Transport Authority and the National Roads Authority have previously raised concerns with regard to the location of the proposed District Centre adjacent to a key motorway interchange as this may result in the unsustainable use of the National road network by local traffic accessing the centre.

 

Given the proximity of the District Centre to the approved Town Centre in the Cherrywood SDZ, it would undermine the designated County and Regional role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town Centre. It is further considered that the provision of a District Centre at Carrickmines would have an adverse retail impact on the existing Neighbourhood Centre in Leopardstown Valley and the proposed Neighbourhood Centre in Kiltiernan.

 

 

3.         Planning History

 

In April 2013 An Bord Pleanala refused planning permission, under D12A/0163, for a mixed-use District Centre development at the Park, Carrickmines, with a net retail floorspace of 11,875 m². This Motion proposes a net retail floorspace of 15,000 m², which is larger than that proposed in the unsuccessful application refused permission by An Bord Pleanala.

 

The Inspectors report stated, inter alia:

 

Start of Excerpt from the Bord’s report

 

6.2 Compatibility with Planning Policy and Guidelines

 

National Transportation Policy and Guidelines

National roads policy is set out in the Policy Statement on Development Management & Access to National Roads, 2006, Smarter Travel - A Sustainable Transport Future, 2009-2020 and Spatial Planning and National Roads, Guidelines for Planning Authorities, 2012.

 

These documents advocate the use of established Town and District Centres as the preferred locations for new retail developments. There is a presumption against large retail centres located adjacent or close to existing, new or planned national roads/motorways as such centres can lead to an inefficient use of costly infrastructure and may undermine the regional/national transport role of the roads.

 

In particular the Spatial Planning and National Roads, Guidelines 2012 states that the primary purpose of the national road network is to provide strategic transport links between the main centres of population and employment, including key international gateways and to provide access between all regions and that any local transport function of a national road must continue to be secondary to the role of these national roads in catering for strategic traffic.

 

The proposed district centre would be located in close proximity to Junction 15 of the M50. The existing retail warehouse component of The Park development already functions as the main location in the county for the purchase of durable goods and it is highly likely that the proposed retail and leisure component will attract consumers who will use the M50 to access the development. In this regard the proposed district centre would undermine national policy for the use of the national road and motorway network for strategic traffic by catering for local traffic.

 

Regional Planning Policy and Guidelines

 

Regional Planning Guidelines:

The Regional Planning Guidelines sets out a Retail Hierarchy in Figure 3 which identifies Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum as Level 2 Major Town Centres and Cherrywood as a Level 3 Town or District Centre along with Stillorgan, Blackrock, Nutgrove and Cornelscourt. Carrickmines is not listed as either a Level 2 Major Town Centre or a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

The Guidelines also set out a Settlement Hierarchy in Table 8 which identifies Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum as Metropolitan Consolidation Towns, Wicklow as a Large Growth Town I and Cherrywood as a Large Growth Town II. Carrickmines is not listed as either a Metropolitan Consolidation Town or as a Large Growth Town I or II.

 

Retail Strategy for the GDA:

The Retail Strategy for the GDA 2008-2016adopts a Retail Hierarchy which respects the different needs of the GDA Metropolitan and Hinterland Areas as defined in the Regional Planning Guidelines 2010-2016 for the GDA.

 

Conclusions:

• The proposed district centre would be contrary to the Settlement Hierarchy set out in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022 which does not identify Carrickmines as a Large Growth Town II.

 

• The proposed district centre would be contrary to the Retail Hierarchy set out in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022 which does not identify Carrickmines as a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

• The proposed district centre would be contrary to the Retail Hierarchy set out in the Retail Strategy for the GDA, 2008-2016 Hierarchy which does not identify Carrickmines as a Level 3 Town or District Centre.

 

• The proposed district centre would undermine the Settlement and Retail Hierarchies and the designated role of Dun Laoghaire and Dundrum as Level 2Town Centres and Metropolitan Consolidation towns (set out in the above regional policy documents) to serve the needs of the County.

 

• The proposed district centre would undermine the designated role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town or District Centre in the Retail Hierarchy and as a Large Growth Town II in the Settlement Hierarchy (in the regional policy documents) to serve the needs of the planned population.

 

• The proposed district centre would undermine the designated role of the Cherrywood SDZ as a designated Level 3 Town or District Centre in the Retail Hierarchy and as a Large Growth Town II in the Settlement Hierarchy (in the regional policy documents) to serve the needs of the planned population.

 

6.3 Retail Impact

 

Retail Impact Assessment

 

Retail catchment:

Both the Retail Impact Assessment and the revised Retail Impact Statement identified a catchment for the proposed District Centre within which the existing and projected population and expenditure levels were both established and extrapolated. It is interesting to note that the eastern boundary of the catchment was not established along empirical guidelines but was based on the assumption that no-one living on the eastern side of the M50 would drive to the proposed centre. The revised RIS made minor amendments to this assumption. Given that the proposed District Centre has direct access to the M50 motorway via Junction 15 it is highly likely that the proposed development will attract shoppers from a much wider catchment than the usual 5-minute drive time or indeed an extended 10 to 15 minute drive time along the M50.

 

Cumulative impact:

Concerns have been raised in relation to the status of the proposed district centre. It has been submitted that the combined floorspace of the proposed District Centre and the existing retail warehouses and restaurants located within the overall park development would equate to the scale of a regional shopping centre.

 

The proposed development would also comprise a substantial leisure component including restaurants and leisure uses, including a gym, multiplex cinema and bowling alley, in addition to the retail and financial services floorspace. The scale of the proposed development, taking in combination with the existing retail warehouse and restaurant floorspace, is excessive for the local area that it would serve. Given its close proximity to the M50 corridor the proposed centre would attract shoppers and leisure seekers from a much wider area. This would in turn draw some trade from the existing Level 2 towns in the County and undermine the existing Level 3towns/district centres in the southern half of the County and the nearby neighbourhood centres.

 

Conclusions:

• Having regard to all of the above I am not convinced that the proposed development would serve an entirely local need or that there would be sufficient capacity within the existing and future catchment population to accommodate the proposed centre. The proposed development would draw trade from other existing centres in the County by virtue of the combination of the existing and proposed range of retail and leisure uses along with the proximity of the proposed centre to the M50. The proposed development would, therefore, adversely affect the vitality and viability of other town, district and neighbourhood centres in the area.

 

6.4 Traffic, Movement and Accessibility.

 

Retail catchment:

The catchment defined by the RIS assumes that the proposed retail uses will serve mainly local needs and that there will be sufficient population and expenditure growth within the catchment to sustain these uses. The surrounding area is characterised by low to medium density residential developments and there are a limited number of sites within the surrounding area that will contribute to future population growth. It is likely, therefore that the success of the proposed District Centre will be dependent on expenditure which originates outside the catchment.

 

Impact on national roads:

Having regard to the proximity of the site to the M50 combined with the good internal road network, the proposed development would impact on the wider road network and the potential impact on the M50 in general and Junction 15 in particular has not been adequately assessed. It should also be noted that there is a national and regional policy presumption against the location of new large scale retail developments adjacent to or in close proximity to planned or improved major roads and additional retail floorspace should be located within existing town centres.

 

Public transport:

The appeal site is located approximately 0.5km from the LUAS and Dublin Bus stop at Ballyogan Road and in close proximity to a Quality Bus Corridor. Although the area is reasonably well served by public transport, the adjoining low to medium density residential areas would not comprise a sufficient population to sustain the quantum of floorspace proposed and the origins of the future workforce is not clear. All of this would indicate that the future success of the proposal could be car dependent…….”.

 

The Inspector then recommended refusing planning permission for the proposed District Centre development for three reasons.

 

The Bord refused planning permission for the proposed District Centre development for two reasons as follows:

 

“REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

 

Having regard to the provisions of:

 

the National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020;

 

the Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Retail Planning, 2012;

 

the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010-2022;

 

the Retail Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2008-2016;

 

the Spatial Planning and National Roads Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2012;

 

• Smarter Travel, A Sustainable Transport Future, A New Transport Policy for Ireland 2009-2020;

 

• A Platform for Change, 2009-2016, The Dublin Transport Office; and

 

the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2010-2016;

 

and to the nature, form, scale, design and location of the proposed development, planning permission is hereby refused for the following reasons:

 

1. Having regard to the location and scale of retail floorspace proposed, it is considered that the proposed development, in addition to the existing level of retail activity in the vicinity, would conflict with the Retail Hierarchy for the Greater Dublin Area as set out in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area 2010-2022 and the Retail Strategy for the Greater Dublin Area 2008-2016, neither of which identifies Carrickmines as a Level 3 District Centre. Furthermore, the proposed development would undermine the Retail Hierarchy for the Greater Dublin Area and the designated role of Dún Laoghaire and Dundrum as level 2 Town Centres to serve the needs of the County. Accordingly, notwithstanding the District Centre zoning objective for the site as set out in the Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2010-2016, it is considered that the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

 

2. Having regard to the location of the proposed development on the periphery of its catchment area, the low population within walking or cycling distance of the proposed District Centre and its close proximity to the M50 Motorway, it is considered that taken in combination with the mix of existing and proposed uses, the proposed development would generate a high level of car dependency. This outcome would-be contrary to national and local transportation policy, as set out in,’ Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future 2009-2020’ and Policy T2 of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Development Plan 2010-2016, which seek to affect modal shift from private cars to more sustainable modes of transport and travel. Taking into consideration the constrained nature of the M50 junctions serving the site together with existing traffic levels, as highlighted by the National Roads Authority and the substantial additional traffic volumes likely to be generated by almost 60,000 square metres of additional developmental this location, it is considered that the proposed development would give rise to a high level of car dependency, promote unsustainable use of the local road network, adversely affect the operational safety and efficiency of the national road network and undermine the benefits of public investment same. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.”

 

 

End of Excerpt from the Bord’s report

 

 

4.         Conclusion

 

Having regard to the Retail Hierarchy for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown as advised in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the GDA 2010-2022 and  the GDA Retail Strategy 2008-2016, the recent planning history for the site (D12A/0163), and in light of already committed retail cores at Cherrywood, Priorsland and Kiltiernan and the existing Neighbourhood Centre at Leopardstown Valley, it is considered there is no objective or reasoned rationale to change the status of The Park, Carrickmines from Neighbourhood Centre to District Centre with a reduced net retail sales cap of 15,000 m².

 

For clarity, in relation to the Judicial Review Proceedings in 2010, the judgment of the High Court was directed solely at the lawfulness of the Direction of the Minister issued under section 31(1) of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The Court expressed no view on what might be described as “the planning merits” of the case; the court had no function in this regard.

 

 

Contact: K.Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive

 

151.

DESIGNATION MAJOR TOWN CENTRES - MOTION NO. 85 & MOTION NO. 9 FROM THE FLOOR pdf icon PDF 34 KB

It was AGREED that Motion No. 85 in the name of Councillor M. Merrigan, and Motion No. 9 from the floor in the names of Councillor M. Merrigan Councillor V. Boyhan, Councillor J. Bailey, Councillor M. Bailey and Councillor C. Devlin be considered together.

 

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 3.2.2.4 Policy RET4: Major Town Centres, page 87, that the designations ‘Edwardian Quarter’, ‘Central Commercial Core’, ‘Town Hall Quarter’ and ‘Artisan Quarter’ be amended to read ‘East End’, ‘Town Centre’, ‘Seafront’ and ‘West End’ in order to more accurately describe their locations and to avoid misleading or inaccurate architectural designations.”  

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion it was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan that Motion No 85 be amended by Motion No 9 from the floor.

 

Motion No. 9 from the floor

 

 “Amend Policy 3.2.2.4: Policy RT 4 to state:  The Council will also encourage the incremental growth of secondary “Quarters” in the Town Centre to create a more nuanced designation for the various historic areas of Dún Laoghaire in order to promote separate, distinct areas based on the character of the area and the type of activities taking place therein, as follows:

 

·         ‘Park End’ – George’s Street Upper, east of the ‘Town Centre’ to the People’s Park and Clarinda Park.

·         ‘Seafront’ – Marine Road to Old Dunleary, Queen’s Road to the People’s Park, including the DLR Lexicon and the Metals.

·         ‘Old Town’ – George’s Street Lower, west of  the ‘Town Centre’ to Dunleary Hill, including Library Road and York Road.”

 

Following a discussion Motion No. 9 from the floor was PUT.  A roll call vote was then called for which resulted as follows:

 

COUNCILLORS:

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAINED

Bailey, John F.

?

 

 

Bailey, Maria

?

 

 

Baker, Marie

?

 

 

Boyhan, Victor

?

 

 

Brennan, Shay

?

 

 

Cuffe, Jennifer

 

?

 

Curran, Chris

?

 

 

Daly, Kevin

 

 

 

Devlin, Cormac

?

 

 

Dockery, Liam

?

 

 

Donnelly, Deirdre

 

 

 

Fayne, Mary

?

 

 

Feeney, Kate

 

?

 

Gill, Karl

?

 

 

Halpin, Melisa

?

 

 

Hanafin, Mary

 

 

?

Hand, Pat

?

 

 

Horkan, Gerry

?

 

 

Humphreys, Richard

 

?

 

Kingston, Deirdre

 

?

 

Lewis, Hugh

?

 

 

Madigan, Josepha

?

 

 

Martin, Catherine

 

?

 

McCarthy, Lettie

 

 

 

McGovern, Lynsey

?

 

 

Merrigan, Michael

?

 

 

Murphy, Brian

?

 

 

Murphy, Tom

?

 

 

NicCormaic, Sorcha

 

 

 

O’Brien, Peter

 

?

 

O’Brien, Shane

?

 

 

O’Callaghan, Denis

 

?

 

O’Neill, Seamas

?

 

 

Richmond, Neale

 

?

 

Saul, Barry

?

 

 

Smyth, Carrie

 

?

 

Smyth, Ossian

 

?

 

Stewart, Patricia

 

?

 

Tallon, Grace

 

?

 

Ward, Barry

?

 

 

TOTAL:

23

12

1

 

 

An Cathaoirleach, Councillor M. Baker declared the amended Motion CARRIED.

 

 

152.

BLACKROCK MAIN STREET AND ROCK HILL -MOTION NO. 86 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Baker and seconded by Councillor J. Bailey.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

On page 92 section 3.2.6 Specific Objectives, subsection (ii) Blackrock to amend the bullet point “To upgrade the public realm along Main Street .etc” to Main Street and Rock Hill.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

153.

UPGRADE BLACKROCK PARK - MOTION NO. 87 pdf icon PDF 59 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Baker and seconded by C. Devlin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

On page 92 section 3.2.6 Specific Objectives, subsection (ii) Blackrock to add the following bullet point “To upgrade Blackrock Park”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

154.

SUPERMARKET SALLYNOGGIN ROAD LOWER - MOTION NO. 88 pdf icon PDF 39 KB

It was proposed by Councillor K. Gill and seconded by Councillor M. Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To ensure that there should be no more than one large supermarket in any future developments along Sallynoggin Road Lower.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

155.

AWARENESS OF LANDSCAPE BIODIVERSITY HERITAGE - MOTION NO.89 pdf icon PDF 46 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor L. McGovern.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 4.1.1. Introduction to Landscape, Heritage and Biodiversity, on page 96, insert the following paragraph as the penultimate paragraph in the Introduction – “The Council will promote an awareness, appreciation and knowledge of the County’s landscape, biodiversity and heritage amongst the public and especially, in primary and secondary schools.” 

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED subject to the following amendment

 

On page 95 Section 4.1.1 (2nd bullet point) it states “The Strategic Vision of this Plan in relation to Landscape, Heritage and Biodiversity must recognise and address the following key issues facing the County:

·         Increasing awareness among all sections of the population of the importance of the County’s landscape, cultural heritage and biodiversity”.

 

 

156.

ROLE OF NATURAL AMENITIES - MOTION NO. 90 pdf icon PDF 57 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor M Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.1.2(i) Landscape include a Policy: Recognizing the role played by natural amenities and landscape, as part of our heritage and as a major resource both for visitors and local people, provide, support, maintain, promote, encourage, protect, preserve, improve, safeguard, facilitate and enhance public access to our natural heritage including mountains, commonage and other hill land, moorlands, forests, rivers, lakes, valleys, 2000 Natura sites, nature reserves, other natural amenities and to the countryside generally by creating a meaningful network of access routes as the opportunity or need arises. Consider appropriate rural recreational and tourism related developments which would facilitate public access to sensitive landscapes. This will be done in co-operation with state agencies, other interested bodies and local community groups.” 

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

157.

LANDSCAPE - MOTION NO. 91 & MOTION NO. 16(a) FROM THE FLOOR pdf icon PDF 63 KB

It was AGREED that Motion No. 91 in the name of Councillor R. Humphreys and Motion No. 16(a) from the floor in the names of Councillors R. Humphreys and Councillor  D. Kingston be considered together.

 

It was proposed byCouncillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Coucillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Chapter 4

*4.1.2(i) Landscape

Include a Policy: Recognizing the role played by natural amenities and landscape, as part of our heritage and as a major resource both for visitors and local people, provide, support, maintain, promote, encourage, protect, preserve, improve, safeguard, facilitate and enhance public access to our natural heritage including mountains, commonage and other hill land, moorlands, forests, rivers, lakes, valleys, 2000 Natura sites, nature reserves, other natural amenities and to the countryside generally by creating a meaningful network of access routes as the opportunity or need arises. Consider appropriate rural recreational and tourism related developments which would facilitate public access to sensitive landscapes. This will be done in co-operation with state agencies, other interested bodies and local community groups.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 16(a) from the floor

 

Motion No. 16(a) from the floor in the names of Councillors R. Humphreys, D. Kingston, M. Baker, C. Devlin, O. Smyth, C. Martin was proposed byCouncillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Coucillor D. Kingston to:

 

“Insert a new policy in LHB with text of first bullet point on P. 96”.

 

Following discussion Motion No. 16(a) from the floor was AGREED .  The Chief Executive’s report on Motion No 91 on the agenda was AGREED.

 

 

158.

DUBLIN MOUNTAINS STRATEGIC PLAN - MOTION NO. 92 pdf icon PDF 31 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.1.2.10 Dublin Mountains Strategic Plan LHB10 substitute "off" for "of".”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

159.

DUBLIN MOUNTAINS STRATEGIC PLAN - MOTION NO. 93 pdf icon PDF 32 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

4.1.2.10 Dublin Mountains Strategic Plan LHB10 Substitute off for of.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

160.

PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY - MOTION NO. 94 pdf icon PDF 49 KB

It was proposed by Councillors C. Smyth and seconded by Councillor D. Kingston.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert in the written statement a long term objective to way mark on public right of way/recreational access routes in the County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

161.

PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY - MOTION NO. 95 pdf icon PDF 29 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

 “That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.1.2.11 Public Rights of Way last paragraph last line omit "subject to resources."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

162.

PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY - MOTION NO. 96 pdf icon PDF 44 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor M. Fayne.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.1.2.11 Public Rights of Way Insert these additional Policies:

"Existing Public Rights of Way and established walking routes shall be identified prior to any new forestry planting, new infrastructural, energy/telecommunications or golf course developments and any other development capable of affecting the respective right of way.

Identify the existing public rights of way which give access to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty or recreational activity using the following methodology:

Place an advert in local papers seeking submissions from the public to identify public rights of way which give access to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty or recreational utility.

Identify existing rights of ways, paths, and access points to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty or recreational activity.

Identify access points to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty or recreational activity which the Council have maintained or repaired with a view to identifying public rights of way.

Carry out a desktop analysis of public records, maps, aerial photographs and newspaper accounts to identify reputations of public rights of way.

Once the list is compiled, advertise and put it on display. The public will be invited to make submissions on the validity of the public rights of way.

Endeavour to verify and list the public rights of way and begin the formal process for designating rights of way under Section 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).

Vary the Plan to include the list and map showing the public rights of way."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

163.

PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY MAP 10, - MOTION NO. 97, 98 AND 105 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was AGREED that Motion No. 97 in the name of Councillor C. Smyth, Motion No. 98 in the name of Councillor R. Humphreys and Motion No. 105 in the name of Councillor O. Smyth be considered together.

 

Motion No. 97 PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY MAP 10

 

It was proposed by Councillor C. Smyth and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert public right of way – spur west of Heronford Lane to Ticknick on Map 10.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 98PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY

 

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Appendix 8 Public Rights Of Way

Reinstate Spur west of Herenford Lane to Ticknock.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 105 SPUR WEST OF HERENFORD LANE TO TICKNOCK

 

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Create new SLO for Map 8 "Reinstate Spur west of Herenford Lane to Ticknock

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion the Chief Executive’s reports were AGREED.

 

 

164.

PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY - MOTION NO. 99 pdf icon PDF 36 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

*4.1.2.11 Public Rights of Way last paragraph last line

Omit subject to resources.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

165.

PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY - MOTION NO. 100 pdf icon PDF 56 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Public Rights of Way – include additional policy:

*Existing Public Rights of Way and established walking routes shall be identified prior to any new forestry planting, new infrastructural, energy/telecommunications or golf course developments and any other development capable of affecting the respective right of way.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

166.

PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY - MOTION NO. 101 pdf icon PDF 45 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Public Rights of Way – include additional policy:

Identify the existing public rights of way which give access to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty recreational activity using the following methodology:

Place an advert in local papers seeking submissions from the public to identify public rights of way which give access to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty or recreational utility.

Identify existing rights of ways, paths, and access points to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty recreational activity.

Identify access points to seashores, mountains, lakeshores, riverbanks or other places of natural beauty or recreational activity which the Council have maintained or repaired with a view to identifying public rights of way.

Carry out a desktop analysis of public records, maps, aerial photographs and newspaper accounts to identify reputations of public rights of way.

Once the list is compiled, advertise and put it on display. The public will be invited to make submissions on the validity of the public rights of way.

Endeavour to verify and list the public rights of way and begin the formal process for designating rights of way under Section 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended).”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

167.

PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY - MOTION NO. 102 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Appendix 8 Public Rights Of Way

* Include Right of Way from Kiltiernan Sports Hotel to Ballybetagh.”

 

The report of the Chief executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

168.

FERNHILL GARDENS - MOTION NOS. 103, 123, 124, 125, 126 AND 127 pdf icon PDF 41 KB

It was AGREED that Motion No. 103, in the name of Councillor C. Curran, Motion No. 123 in the name of Councillor T. Murphy, Motion No.124 in the name of Councillor K. Daly, Motion No. 125 in the name of Councillor L.McGovern, Motion No. 126 in the name of Councillor L. McGovern and Motion No. 127 in the name of Councillor L. McGovern be considered together.

 

Motion No. 103 Fernhill Gardens

 

It was proposed by Councillor  C. Curran and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Section 9 Maps 9 SLO 36.

Amend

“To preserve trees, woodlands and amenity gardens at Fernhill

To

“To prepare a masterplan that will include the preservation of trees, woodland and amenities, while promoting outdoor activities, education and a place of leisure at Fernhill Gardens to such an extent that its day to day operations become financially self-sustainable.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 123 FERNHILL

 

It was proposed by Councillor T. Murphy and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert a provision in the Draft Development Plan providing that the Chief Executive develops the recently bought Fernhills lands into a public park over the period of the next Development Plan 2016-2022.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 124 FERNHILL

 

It was proposed by Councillor K. Daly and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That A Master Development Plan Be Drawn Up For Fernhill Gardens In Stepaside In The Early Stage Of The Life Of This Development Plan 2016 To 2022.This Is To Facilitate The Best Use Of This Wonderful Acquisition By The Council For The People Of The Surrounding Area And The Wider Community Of The Greater Dublin Area.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

 

 

Motion No. 125 PLAN FOR FERNHILL

 

It was proposed by Councillor L. McGovern and seconded by Councillor B. Ward.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Fernhill Gardens  

Specific Local Objective:

“To develop a Master Plan for Fernhill Gardens.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED

 

Motion No. 126 TEAROOMS AT FERNHILL

 

It was proposed by Councillor L. McGovern and seconded by Councillor C. Curran.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Fernhill Gardens

Specific Local Objective:

“To develop public tea rooms at Fernhill Gardens.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No.127 CHILDREN'S LEISURE FACILITIES AT FERNHILL GARDENS

 

It was proposed by Councillor L. McGovern and seconded by Councillor B. Ward.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Fernhill Gardens

Specific Local Objective:

"To develop Children's leisure facilities at Fernhill Gardens."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion the amendments recommended in the Chief Executive’s reports on Motion Nos. 103, 123, 124, 125, 126 and 127 were AGREED.

 

 

169.

RIGHT OF WAY MAP 8 -MOTION NO.104 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Create new SLO for Map 8 "Include Right of Way from Kiltiernan Sports Hotel to Ballybetagh."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

170.

TRAILS, HIKING & WALKING ROUTES - MOTION NO. 106 pdf icon PDF 36 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor B. Ward.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

*8 4.1.2.14 Pol LHB 14 Trails, Hiking & Walking Routes

Omit “where feasible and appropriate.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

171.

OUTDOOR PURSUITS - MOTION NO. 107 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 8 4.1.2.14 Pol LHB 14 Trails, Hiking & Walking Routes omit "where feasible and appropriate."”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion, the following amendment to Motion No. 107 was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 8 4.1.2.14 Pol LHB 14 Trails, Hiking & Walking Routes omit "where feasible” and replace with “where possible."”

 

The amended Motion was PUT.  A roll call vote was then called for which resulted as follows:

 

COUNCILLORS:

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAINED

Bailey, John F.

 

?

 

Bailey, Maria

 

?

 

Baker, Marie

 

?

 

Boyhan, Victor

?

 

 

Brennan, Shay

 

?

 

Cuffe, Jennifer

 

?

 

Curran, Chris

 

?

 

Daly, Kevin

 

?

 

Devlin, Cormac

 

?

 

Dockery, Liam

 

?

 

Donnelly, Deirdre

 

?

 

Fayne, Mary

?

 

 

Feeney, Kate

 

?

 

Gill, Karl

 

?

 

Halpin, Melisa

 

?

 

Hanafin, Mary

 

?

 

Hand, Pat

 

?

 

Horkan, Gerry

 

?

 

Humphreys, Richard

?

 

 

Kingston, Deirdre

?

 

 

Lewis, Hugh

 

?

 

Madigan, Josepha

 

?

 

Martin, Catherine

?

 

 

McCarthy, Lettie

?

 

 

McGovern, Lynsey

 

?

 

Merrigan, Michael

?

 

 

Murphy, Brian

 

?

 

Murphy, Tom

 

?

 

NicCormaic, Sorcha

 

 

 

O’Brien, Peter

?

 

 

O’Brien, Shane

 

?

 

O’Callaghan, Denis

 

?

 

O’Neill, Seamas

 

?

 

Richmond, Neale

 

?

 

Saul, Barry

?

 

 

Smyth, Carrie

?

 

 

Smyth, Ossian

?

 

 

Stewart, Patricia

 

?

 

Tallon, Grace

?

 

 

Ward, Barry

?

 

 

TOTAL:

13

26

 

 

AnCathaoirleach Councillor M. Baker DECLARED the amended Motion DEFEATED.

 

 

172.

FENCING OF HITHERTO OPEN LAND - MOTION NO. 108 pdf icon PDF 65 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Create new section 4.1.2.16 "Policy LHB16: Fencing of hitherto Open Land.”

 

It is a requirement of the Planning Regulations 2001 Art 9(I)(a)(x) that the fencing of land open to or used by the public during the ten years preceding such fencing or enclosure for recreational purposes or as a means of access to any seashore, mountain or other place of natural beauty or recreational utility, requires planning permission. Wire fencing constitutes visual pollution and destroys the “away from it all” feeling which makes upland areas such an attraction for both local people and visitors. There has been a large increase in the amount of new fencing in upland areas. Barbed wire has been used in most of this new fencing, which, in the absence of stiles or gates, makes access for recreational users of our countryside almost impossible. Traditional hill-sheep farming rarely required fencing, but since the introduction of REPS(now AEOS), sheep-farmers must stock-proof their land. The challenge is to ensure that such fencing will be done in a manner that will meet the requirements of AEOS without impinging on access for hill walkers.

Policy: The following criteria will be used when considering planning applications for new fencing of hitherto open land: Fencing in upland or amenity areas will not normally be permitted unless such fencing is essential to the viability of the farm and that it conforms to the best agricultural practice. The nature of the material to be used, the height of the fence, and in the case of a wire fence the type of wire to be used will be taken into account. Stiles or gates at appropriate places will be required. Barbed-wire will not be used for the top line of wire."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

173.

WALKWAYS IN THE DUBLIN MOUNTAINS - MOTION NO. 109 pdf icon PDF 39 KB

It was proposed by Councillor T. Murphy and seconded by Councillor P. Hand.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert a provision in the Draft Development Plan providing that the Chief Executive promotes and develops additional walk ways in the Dublin Mountain area over the period of the next Development Plan 2016-2022.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

174.

ACCESS TO FORESTRY AND WOODLAND - MOTION NO. 110 pdf icon PDF 58 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Include additional section in chapter 4

Forestry

*1 Encourage, promote, provide, facilitate and protect access to forestry and woodlands, including private forestry, in co-operation with coillte, the forest service and other agencies, for walking routes(including long distance and looped walks), mountain trails, nature trails, mountain bike trails, bridle paths, hiking, orienteering and other non-noise generating recreational activities for the benefit of local people and tourists and take into account the forest service 2006 publication “forest recreation guide for owners and managers”. The council will support the development of purpose built trails and cycle tracks. Regulate development to maximise recreational amenity and community uses.

*2 Identify public rights of way and established walking routes before planting commences.

*3 Forestry shall not obstruct existing public rights of way, traditional walking routes or recreational and tourism amenities and ensure that they are protected and retained as Public Rights of Way/Walking Routes.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

175.

WILD MEADOW IN PARKS - MOTION NO. 111 pdf icon PDF 27 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor C. Martin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To append the following to section 4.1.3.1 Policy LHB16: Protection of Natural Heritage and the Environment, "Reserve, where possible, a portion of each park and substantial green open space taken in charge as wild meadow where grass cutting and planting are not carried out."

 

In accordance with Standing Orders An Cathaoirleach ruled the Motion out of order as the Motion was not in respect a strategic Development Plan issue.

 

 

176.

URBAN MEADOWS - MOTION NO. 112 pdf icon PDF 36 KB

It was proposed by Councillor  H. Lewis and seconded by  Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

(PAGE 107 4.1.3.6)That the Plan encourages the expansion of urban meadows in areas deemed appropriate in the County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion the motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED

 

 

177.

ACCESS TO GEOLOGICAL SITES - MOTION NO. 113 pdf icon PDF 39 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.1.3.9 Geological Sites 

Include additional Policy:" Encourage, promote, facilitate and support access and public rights of way to geological and geo-morphological features of heritage value and co-ordinate the continuing development of strategic walking routes, trails and other recreational activities."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

178.

ACCESS AND PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY TO GEOLOGICAL SITES - MOTION NO. 114 pdf icon PDF 47 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

*4.1.3.9 Geological Sites

Include additional Policy: Encourage, promote, facilitate and support access and public rights of way to geological and geo-morphological features of heritage value and co-ordinate the continuing development of strategic walking routes, trails and other recreational activities.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

179.

P110 POLICY LHB26 INSERTION OF NEW WORDS - MOTION 115 pdf icon PDF 27 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor D. Kingston.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

P 110 policy LHB26 delete from “to support…” to “… and manage” and insert “to combat”.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

180.

HERITAGE PLAN - MOTION NO. 116 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor S. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 4.1.4.1 Policy LBH27: Heritage Plan, on page 111, that the following be deleted from the third paragraph in this section, ‘that funding may be an issue over the life time of the Plan’ and that the sentence ends after the word ‘recognition’.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

181.

P112 POLICY LHB30 DELETION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 117 pdf icon PDF 26 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

P 112 policy LHB30 delete “resources and”.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

182.

P112 POLICY LHB30 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 118 pdf icon PDF 27 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

P 112 policy LHB30 3rd para after “erected by the Council” insert “(or erected by other bodies with Council support or approval)”.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion, Mr. T. Carey, Acting Chief Parks Superintendent responded to members’ queries.

 

The Motion was AGREED.

 

 

183.

CIVIC MEMORIALS - MOTION NO. 119 pdf icon PDF 34 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor C. Devlin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 4.1.4.1 Policy LBH30: Civic Memorials, page 112, that in the final sentence of the second paragraph following the word ‘statue’ the words ‘suitable piece of public art’ to facilitate the use of such to memorialise where appropriate and agreed.” 

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

184.

ASHCASTLE SITE - MOTION NO. 120 pdf icon PDF 74 KB

It was proposed by Councillor V. Boyhan and seconded by Councillor B. Ward.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Ashcastle Site – Booterstown

Provide for a special policy / objective:

In recognition of the location of this site next to a sensitive eco system, namely Booterstown Bird Marsh, that no residential or commercial building development be permitted.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion, Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to members’ queries.

 

The Motion was AGREED subject to amendment proposed by the Motion being incorporated into the Draft Development Plan as a Specific Local Objective in respect of the site.

 

 

185.

WILD ORCHID MEADOW - MOTION NO. 121 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

Additional documents:

It was proposed by Councillor V. Boyhan and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Wild Orchid Meadow – Ballycorus

“That special reference be made to this site in the Written Statement setting out an objective for its protection.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s Report were AGREED with an amendment in the spelling of “Kiltiernan”.

 

 

186.

COUNTRYSIDE RECREATION AND TOURISM - MOTION NO. 122 pdf icon PDF 36 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Include additional section in chapter 4

Countryside Recreation and Tourism includes walking, cycling, mountain and other off-road biking, nature, wildlife, heritage and maritime trails, bird/ deer watching, whale/seal/ dolphin watching, painting, photography, field studies, back-packing, orienteering, para- and hang- gliding, canoeing, kayaking and rafting, caving, hill walking, mountaineering, rock climbing, adventure sports, swimming in waterways, wild camping, pony trekking, boating, archaeological guided walks and that these activities be coordinated, where appropriate, with adjoining counties including cross-border ones.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

187.

SHANGANAGH PARK - MOTION NO. 128 pdf icon PDF 41 KB

It was proposed by Councillor S. O'Brien  and seconded by Councillor L. McGovern.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To designate Shanganagh Park a regional park within the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown hierarchy of parks structure.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

188.

DISABLED TOILETS PARKS - MOTION NO. 129 pdf icon PDF 38 KB

It was proposed by Councillor  S. O’Brien and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Motion: Section 4.2.2.2 - Disabled Toilets

Section 4.2.2.2 Policy OSR4: Future Improvements (Page 115 Chief Exec’s draft) That this plan would include an intention to put disabled toilets in all regional, district and local parks.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

189.

Removal of words - MOTION NO. 130 pdf icon PDF 29 KB

It was proposed by Councillor S. O'Brien and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

4.2.2.3 Future improvements

 

Parks

 

Remove “it is intended” to state that all Regional Parks will eventually include public toilets with disabled facilities, event spaces and ornamental gardens”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

190.

PAGE 116 4.2.25 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 131 pdf icon PDF 38 KB

It was proposed by Councillor H. Lewis and seconded by Councillor K. Gill.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

(PAGE 116 4.2.2.5 insert)That the Plan encourages the proliferation of community gardens and allotments throughout the County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

191.

ALLOTMENTS AND COMMUNITY GARDENS - MOTION NO. 132 pdf icon PDF 38 KB

It was proposed by Councillor  C. Curran and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Section 4.2.2.5 Policy OSR6: Allotments and Community Gardens

Amend

“It is the Council’s policy to support the development of additional public allotments”

To

“It is the Council’s policy to promote and encourage the development of additional public allotments.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

192.

STILLORGAN - TREE PLANTING -MOTION NO. 133 pdf icon PDF 29 KB

It was proposed by Councillor D. Donnelly and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Stillorgan – Tree Planting

Specific Local Objective:

 

“That a comprehensive Street Tree Planting scheme be prepared and implemented for Stillorgan environs

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

193.

CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN KILBOGGET AND LOUGHLINSTOWN PARKS - MOTION NO. 134 pdf icon PDF 51 KB

It was proposed by Councillor C. Smyth and seconded by Councillor H. Lewis.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert on Map 10 a Specific Local Objective to improve pedestrian/cycle connectivity between Kilbogget Park and Loughlinstown Linear Park and improve local community facilities?”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion, Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to members’ queries.

 

The motion was AGREED subject to the following amendment

 

“To insert on Map 10 a Specific Local Objective to improve pedestrian/cycle connectivity between Kilbogget Park and Loughlinstown Linear Park and thus improve local community connectivity?”

 

 

194.

JAMESTOWN REGIONAL PARK - MOTION NO. 135 pdf icon PDF 103 KB

It was proposed by Councillor T. Murphy and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert a provision in the Draft Development Plan providing that the Chief Executive commits to the completion of the Jamestown Regional Park at the old land fill site in Ballyogan during the period of the next Development Plan 2016-2022 and allocate future development levies in this catchment area for this project.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion, Mr. R. Shakespeare, Director of Services and Mr. F. Austin, Director of Services responded to members’ queries.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

195.

MASTERPLAN FOR FORMER BALLYOGAN LANDFILL SITE - MOTION NO. 136 pdf icon PDF 48 KB

It was proposed by Councillor L. McCarthy and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

in Section 4.2.2.8 Policy OSR9; Former Ballyogan Landfill Site include that a Part 8 masterplan would be prepared in advance of the EPA’s sign off.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

196.

Adjournment of Meeting

It was AGREED to ADJOURN the meeting for 30 minutes.

 

The meeting ADJOURNED at 7.30 p.m.

 

 

197.

Reconvening of Meeting

The meeting RECONVENED at 8.00 pm.

 

 

198.

Motion No. 11 from the floor

Motion No. 11 from the floor in the names of Councillors J. Bailey, M. Bailey, J Madigan, N. Richmond, L. Dockery, M. Fayne, B. Murphy, B. Saul, P. Stewart, M. Halpin, C. Devlin L, McGovern was proposed by Councillor J. Bailey and seconded by Councillor M. Bailey be CONSIDERED:

 

“Page: 101 Section 4.1.3.8 – Policy LHB8: Coastline Parks and Harbours

 

Amend the last line in the second paragraph to read:

 

‘It is the objective of this Council to maintain the Coal Harbour area and the East and West Piers of Dún Laoghaire Harbour as publicly accessible facilities.”

 

The motion was AGREED.

 

 

199.

Motion No. 13 from the floor

Motion No. 13 from the floor in the names of Councillors J. Bailey, M. Bailey, J. Madigan, N. Richmond, B. Murphy, L. Dockery, M. Fayne, B. Saul, P. Stewart, M. Merrigan, L. McGovern, K. Daly, S. O’Neill, P. Hand was proposed by Councillor J. Bailey and seconded by Councillor M. Bailey

 

“Page: 101 Section 4.1.3.8 – Policy LHB8: Coastline Parks and Harbours

 

Amend this section to include the following paragraph at the end of the section.

 

It is the intention of this Council to develop a linear marine parkland and walkway connecting the parkland areas at Newtownsmith with the beach area at Queen’s Road and onward to the East Pier in Dún Laoghaire”

 

The motion was AGREED.

 

 

200.

SWIMMING POOL - STILLORGAN - MOTION NO. 137 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor D. Donnelly and seconded by Councillor B. Ward.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Swimming Pool Facility - Stillorgan

Specific Local Objective:

 

“To develop a swimming pool facility in Stillorgan.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

201.

SPORTS FACILITIES- STILLORGAN - MOTION NO. 138 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor D. Donnelly and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Sports Facilities

Specific Local Objective:

 

"To identify new sites for outdoor sports clubs / facilities in the Stillorgan LEA.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion, Mr. R. Shakespeare, Director of Services responded to members’ queries.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

202.

WATER-BASED SPORTS - MOTION NOS. 139 & 140 pdf icon PDF 35 KB

It was AGREED that Motion No. 139 in the name of Councillor R. Humphreys and Motion No. 140 in the name of Councillor O. Smyth be considered together.

 

Motion No. 139 Water-based sports

 

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

4.2.2.11 Water-Based Sports

Add: Severely restrict and control water skiing and jet-skis.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 140 Water –based sports

 

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor H. Lewis.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.2.2.11 Water-Based Sports

Add: "Severely restrict and control water skiing and jet-skis."

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following discussion during the course of which Mr. R. Shakespeare Director of Services and Ms. K. Holohan Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries.

 

The following amendment was AGREED - the addition of the text in bold.

 

In section 4.2.2.11 Water-Based Sports

Add: "subject to Beach Bye-Laws”

 

 

203.

INCLUSION OF SUBSECTIONS IN WATER-BASED SPORTS -MOTION NO. 141 pdf icon PDF 51 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 4.2.2.11 Water-Based Sports

 

Include additional sub sections:

 

A Countryside Recreation and Tourism includes walking, cycling, mountain and other off-road biking, nature, wildlife, heritage and maritime trails, bird/ deer watching, whale/seal/ dolphin watching, painting, photography, field studies, back-packing, orienteering, para- and hang- gliding, canoeing, kayaking and rafting, caving, hill walking, mountaineering, rock climbing, adventure sports, swimming in waterways, wild camping, pony trekking, boating, archaeological guided walks and that these activities be coordinated, where appropriate, with adjoining counties including cross-border ones.

 

B Forestry 

 

1 Encourage, promote, provide, facilitate and protect access to forestry and woodlands, including private forestry, in co-operation with Coillte, the Forest Service and other agencies, for walking routes(including long distance and looped walks), mountain trails, nature trails, mountain bike trails, bridle paths, hiking, orienteering and other non-noise generating recreational activities for the benefit of local people and tourists and take into account the Forest Service 2006 publication “Forest Recreation Guide for Owners and Managers”. The Council will support the development of purpose built trails and cycle tracks. Regulate development to maximise recreational amenity and community uses.

 

2 Identify public rights of way and established walking routes before planting commences.

 

3 Forestry shall not obstruct existing public rights of way, traditional walking routes or recreational and tourism amenities and ensure that they are protected and retained as Public Rights of Way/Walking Routes.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

204.

ADDITION OF TEXT RE EQUIPMENT/FACILITIES FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES IN PLAYPARKS - MOTION NO. 142 pdf icon PDF 33 KB

It was proposed by Councillor C. Martin and seconded by Councilor V. Boyhan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

RE Open Space and Recreation

Policy OSR13 – Section 4.2.2.12

 

Proposed addition of text in bold print:

 

It is the Council’s policy to support the provision of structured and unstructured play areas with the appropriate equipment and facilities through the County, and to ensure the needs of all age groups –children, teenagers, adults and older people- are facilitated in the public parks of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. Furthermore it is Council policy that any new playparks in the County will be designed to include equipment and/or facilities for children with disabilities.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

205.

PLAY FACILITIES- MOTION NO. 143 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was proposed by Councillor C. Curran and seconded by Councillor K. Daly.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Section 4.2.2.12 Policy OSR13: Play Facilities

Amend

“It is the Council’s policy to support the provision of structured and unstructured play areas”

To

“It is the Council’s policy to promote and encourage communities to form an informal partnership with the Council in the provision of structured and unstructured play areas.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

206.

PERMEABLE PAVING SURFACE -MOTION NO. 144 pdf icon PDF 38 KB

It was proposed by Councillor T. Murphy and seconded by Councillor N. Richmond.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To insert a provision in the Draft Development Plan providing that the Chief Executive ensures that all future developments use permeable paving surface to allow for natural drainage and prevent or alleviate run off water when it is raining heavily.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

207.

WATER HARVESTING - MOTION NO. 145 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor H. Lewis and seconded by Councillors B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To promote the advancement of grey water harvesting systems and other water conservation measures in the County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion, Mr. F. Austin, Director of Services responded to members’ queries and advised the members that in order to implement the motion it will be necessary for regulations under the Water Services Act 2007 to be introduced

 

The Chief Executive’s report was NOTED and the Motion was AGREED.

 

 

208.

PRIVATE WASTE COMPANIES - MOTION NO. 146 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was proposed by Councillor P. O’Brien and seconded by Councillor K. Gill.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Page 129 5.1.2.3 Policy EI14: Private Waste Companies – To Add

That the Council will only engage with Private Waste Companies that recognise and actively work with workers unions.”

 

In accordance with Standing Orders An Cathaoirleach ruled the Motion out of Order as the Motion was not in respect of a Strategic Development Plan issue.

 

209.

LITTER WARDENS - MOTION NO. 147 pdf icon PDF 29 KB

It was proposed by Councillor P. O’Brien and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

5.1.3.5 Litter Control

 

That the Chief Executive seeks to increase the number of litter wardens active within the County over the course of the County Development Plan 2016-2022.”

 

In accordance with Standing Orders An Cathaoirleach ruled the Motion out of Order as the Motion was not in respect of a Strategic Development Plan issue.

 

210.

ASHCASTLE SITE - BOOTERSTOWN - MOTION NO. 148 pdf icon PDF 27 KB

It was proposed by Councillor V. Boyhan and seconded by Councillor B. Ward.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Ashcastle Site – Booterstown

That the County Development Plan maps how reference to the fact that infrastructure pertaining to the National Gas Grid runs through the Ashcastle site.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion was AGREED subject to agreement that it would be represented by an additional symbol on map No. 2

 

 

211.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE - MOTION NO. 149 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

To append the following to section 5.1.5.3 Policy EI28: Telecommunications Infrastructure, "When roadways, cycleways, pedestrian routes and other large wayleaves are being constructed or refurbished, the Council will install ducting for the provision of fibre broadband, where feasible."

 

In accordance with Standing Orders An Cathaoirleach ruled the Motion out of Order as the Motion was not in respect of a Strategic Development Plan issue.

 

 

212.

DELETION OF WORDS 5.2.3.2 POLICY CC7 - MOTION NO. 150 pdf icon PDF 27 KB

It was proposed by Councillor P. Stewart and seconded by Councillor B. Saul

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

5.2.3.2. Policy CC7. Energy Performance in New Buildings second last paragraph, delete ‘where appropriate.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The motion and the Chief Executive’s report were AGREED.

 

 

213.

RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGETS - MOTION NO. 151 pdf icon PDF 45 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Halpin and seconded by Councillor K. Gill.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That, in the lifetime of this Plan, the Council will support and encourage the development of district energy and community co-op projects as a way of contributing to meeting the national 2020 renewable energy targets and encouraging local employment.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED

 

During the course of the discussion which followed Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries.  The Deputy Chief Executive’s verbal report was NOTED and the Motion was AGREED.

 

 

214.

MOTION NO. 16 FROM THE FLOOR

Motion No. 16 from the floor in the names of Councillors M. Baker, C. Devlin, O. Smyth, C,. Martin, R. Humphreys, D. Kingston was proposed by Councillor M. Baker and seconded by Councillor C. Devlin and Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Page 138/139. Section 5.2.3.2, Policy CC7: Energy Performance in New Buildings

 

Add new second paragraph (in bold): ‘it is Council policy that all development in new buildings should be built to Passive House standard.  Buildings constructed to nZEB standard or other low energy standard may be considered as an appropriate alternative.’

 

Delete the first sentence of second last paragraph.

 

In Chapter 8 Development Management, Section 8.2.10.3, provide a definition of ‘Passive House’ and list information required to be submitted to demonstrate compliance with Policy CC7.

 

A discussion followed during which Ms. A. Dargan County Architect & Director of Culture responded to Members’ queries.  Ms K. Holohan Deputy Chief Executive advised that if the Motion was passed that the proposed policy would be a mandatory requirement which all applications would have to comply with and she recommended that the Motion not be passed.

 

Motion No. 16 from the floor was PUT.  A roll call vote was then called for which resulted as follows:

 

COUNCILLORS:

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAINED

Bailey, John F.

 

?

 

Bailey, Maria

 

?

 

Baker, Marie

?

 

 

Boyhan, Victor

?

 

 

Brennan, Shay

?

 

 

Cuffe, Jennifer

 

?

 

Curran, Chris

?

 

 

Daly, Kevin

?

 

 

Devlin, Cormac

?

 

 

Dockery, Liam

 

?

 

Donnelly, Deirdre

?

 

 

Fayne, Mary

?

 

 

Feeney, Kate

 

?

 

Gill, Karl

?

 

 

Halpin, Melisa

?

 

 

Hanafin, Mary

 

?

 

Hand, Pat

 

?

 

Horkan, Gerry

 

?

 

Humphreys, Richard

?

 

 

Kingston, Deirdre

 

?

 

Lewis, Hugh

?

 

 

Madigan, Josepha

 

 

 

Martin, Catherine

?

 

 

McCarthy, Lettie

 

?

 

McGovern, Lynsey

?

 

 

Merrigan, Michael

?

 

 

Murphy, Brian

 

 

 

Murphy, Tom

 

?

 

NicCormaic, Sorcha

 

 

 

O’Brien, Peter

?

 

 

O’Brien, Shane

?

 

 

O’Callaghan, Denis

 

?

 

O’Neill, Seamas

?

 

 

Richmond, Neale

?

 

 

Saul, Barry

?

 

 

Smyth, Carrie

 

?

 

Smyth, Ossian

?

 

 

Stewart, Patricia

?

 

 

Tallon, Grace

 

?

 

Ward, Barry

?

 

 

TOTAL:

23

14

 

 

AnCathaoirleach Councillor M. Baker declared the Motion CARRIED.

 

 

215.

MOTION NO. . 15 FROM THE FLOOR - PASSIVE HOUSE OR EQUIVALENT STANDARD - WITHDRAWN

It  was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor  C. Martin and AGREED to WITHDRAW Motion No. 15 from the floor  as follows:

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Amend section 5.2.3.2 Policy CC7: Energy Performance in New Buildings as follows:

 

Substitute

“Unless exceptional circumstances apply, the Council will require new buildings that are not exempted from BER rating, to reach passive house standard or equivalent for “The Council will, where appropriate, promote development in new buildings to reach near Zero Energy Build and/or Passive House standard.”

 

 

216.

PAGE 145 6.1.1 AMENDMENT OF WORDING - MOTION NO. 152 pdf icon PDF 39 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.1. Introduction to Archaeological and Architectural Heritage, page 145, the references to ‘Victorian terraces, Georgian houses’ be amended to read ‘Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian era buildings, including the early twentieth century social housing stock’ and in the same section, provide an appropriate definition for the concept of ‘sense of place’ in relation to our County’s archaeological and architectural heritage.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries,

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s Report was AGREED and it was also AGREED that an explanation/definition of ‘sense of place’ would be included in the Draft Development Plan 2016-2022.

 

 

217.

INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL POLICY ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE - MOTION NOS. 153, 154, 155 and 18 from the floor pdf icon PDF 56 KB

It was AGREED that Motion No. 153 in the name of Councillor R. Humphreys , Motion No. 154 in the name of Councillor R. Humphreys, Motion No. 155 in the name of Councillor O. Smyth  be considered together.

 

Motion No. 153

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Chapter 6 

6.1.2 Archaeological Heritage

Include additional Policy:

*Recognising the importance of archaeology and National Monuments as part of our heritage and inheritance, provide, promote, enhance, facilitate, encourage, support, and protect public access to archaeological sites, National monuments, battlefields, historic burial grounds and graveyards and site, of historic interest, in direct ownership, guardianship  or control of the Council and/or the State  or private ownership. Appropriate signage will be put in place. Information on access to sites will be made be available on the Council’s web-site.(Insert address).”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 154

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Chapter 6 

6.1.2 Archaeological Heritage

Include additional Policy:

Protect, preserve, improve  and maintain existing public rights of way to archaeological sites and designate  traditional walking routes as public rights of way and in other cases, routes will be acquired by agreement with landowners or by way of compulsory powers.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 155

It was proposed by Councillor O. Smyth and seconded by Councillor R. Humphreys.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

In section 6.1.2 Archaeological Heritage

 

Include additional Policies: 

 

A  Recognising the importance of archaeology and National Monuments as part of our heritage and inheritance, provide, promote, enhance, facilitate, encourage, support, and protect public access to archaeological sites, National monuments, battlefields, historic burial grounds and graveyards and sites of historic interest, in direct ownership, guardianship  or control of the Council and/or the State  or private ownership.  Appropriate signage will be put in place. Information on access to sites will be made be available on the Council’s web-site.

 

B  Protect, preserve, improve  and maintain existing public rights of way to archaeological sites and designate  traditional walking routes as public rights of way and in other cases, routes will be acquired by agreement with landowners or by way of compulsory powers.  “

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 18 from the Floor

 

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor D. Kingston.

 

“Add at end of first sentence of AH1 “and where feasible and appropriate to promote access to and signposting of such sites and monuments”.

 

The Chief Executive’s Reports on Motion Nos. 153, 154, 155 were AGREED and Motion No. 18 from the floor was AGREED

 

 

218.

PAGE 146 INSERTION OF PARAGRAPH - MOTION NO. 156 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor B. Saul.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.2.1. Policy AH1: Protection of Archaeological Heritage, page 146, insert the following paragraph as the final paragraph in this section, that ‘The Council will have due regard for areas of archaeological potential whether associated with known archaeological sites or national monuments or in ‘brown field sites’ in urban areas.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive’s Report was AGREED.

 

 

219.

PAGE 146 POLICY AH2 DELETION OF WORDS & MOTION NO. 157 & MOTION NO. 19 FROM THE FLOOR pdf icon PDF 27 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

P 146 policy AH2 delete (or, as a minimum, preservation by record)”.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Motion No. 19 from the floor:

 

Motion No. 19 from the floor was proposed by Councillor R. Humprheys and seconded by Councillor D. O’Callaghan to amend Motion No. 157  as follows:-

 

“In policy AH2 first sentence after “or” insert “where this is not possible or appropriate”.

 

The amended Motion was AGREED

 

 

220.

PAGE 147 6.1.2.5 POLICY AH5 INCLUSION OF DEFINITION AND A NEW PARAGRAPH - MOTION NO. 158 pdf icon PDF 38 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.2.5. Policy AH5: Historic Burial Grounds, page 147, that a definition of ‘historic burial grounds’ be included in this section and insert the following paragraph – “The Council recognises the importance of recording the texts of the memorial inscriptions on the headstones in the historic burial grounds as a unique and invaluable record of the County’s heritage and social history.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

221.

MOTION NO. 12 FROM THE FLOOR SECTION 6.1.2.5 POLICY AH5: HISTORIC BURIAL GROUNDS

Motion No. 12 from the floor in the names of Councillors J. Bailey, M. Bailey, J. Madigan, N. Richmond, L. Dockery, M. Fayne, B. Murphy, B. Saul, P. Stewart, M. Halpin, C. Devlin was proposed by Councillor J. Bailey and seconded by Councillor M. Bailey.

 

“Page 147 Section 6.1.2.5 Policy AH5: Historic Burial Grounds

 

Amend this section to include the following as a Specific Local Objective:

 

“It is the intention of this Council to produce a digital photographic record, including the GPS coordinates, of each of the headstones in Shanganagh and Deansgrange Cemeteries and in the older cemeteries and burial grounds in public ownership in the County in order to capture in a digital format this aspect of our County’s heritage”.

 

In accordance with Standing Orders An Cathaoirleach ruled the Motion out of Order as the Motion was not in respect of a Strategic Development Plan issue.

 

 

222.

SECTION 6.1.2.5 POLICY AH14 INSERTION OF NEW PARAGRAPH - MOTION NO. 159 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

It was proposed by Councillor C. Curran and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Section 6.1.2.5 Policy AH14

Add new paragraph

 

“It is also the Council’s policy to promote and encourage access to burial grounds where possible.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

223.

P148 POLICY AR3 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 160 pdf icon PDF 38 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor L. McCarthy.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

P 148 policy AR3 after “when” insert “considering or”.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Motion and Chief Executive’s report was AGREED

 

 

224.

PAGE 148 6.1.3.6 POLICY AR6 INSERTION OF SENTENCE - MOTION NO. 161 pdf icon PDF 42 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor M. Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.3.6. Policy AR6: – Protection of Buildings in Council Ownership, page 148, insert the following sentence at the end of the second paragraph, “The Council’s own social housing stock dating from the early twentieth century, predominately Edwardian terraces with associated streetscapes, is of particular heritage, historical and social significance.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED

 

 

225.

PAGE 148 6.1.3.7 POLICY AR6 INCLUSION OF PARAGRAPH - MOTION NO. 162 pdf icon PDF 45 KB

It was proposed by Councillor K. Gill and seconded by Councillor M. Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Built Heritage Strategy

 

Page 148 6.1.3.7 Policy AR6 Include the following: 

 

The Council acknowledges the historical and architectural importance of the pavilion at the old Baths Site on Queens Road in Dun Laoghaire. This building has serious potential to significantly contribute to the character and appearance of the seafront. It is Council policy to ensure that any redevelopment of this building, takes into account this historical and architectural significance.“

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The amendment recommended in the Chief Executive’s report was AGREED .

 

 

226.

EXTENSION OF MEETING

At 8.00p.m. it was proposed by An Cathaoirleach Councillor M. Baker and AGREED to extend the meeting to 10.30p.m and to review the position in relation to the number of Motions considered prior to 10.30p.m.

 

 

227.

P140 POLICY AR8 INSERTION OF WORDS AND MOTION NO 163 & MOTION NO . 20 FROM THE FLOOR pdf icon PDF 29 KB

It was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

P 140 at the end of the section re policy AR8 insert “In particular the distinctive original appearance of the Kenny built residences in Mount Merrion shall be preserved.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED and motion no. 20 from the floor was submitted as an amendment to Agenda Item 163.

 

Motion No. 20 from the floor

 

Motion No. 20 from the floor in the names of  Councillors R. Humphreys, D. Donnelly, L. Dockery, G. Horkan was proposed by Councillor R. Humphreys and seconded by Councillor D. Donnelly:-

 

“To insert an SLO for Mount Merrion (Map 2) “To preserve the distinctive original appearance of the Kenny – built residences in Mount Merrion”.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. J. Craig, Acting Conservation Officer and  Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries,

Councillor R. Humphreys proposed an amendment to Motion 20 from the floor as follows:-

 

Insert the word “external” after the word original.

 

Following a discussion Motion No. 20 from the floor with the amendment was  

PUT.  A roll call vote was then called for which resulted as follows:-

 

COUNCILLORS:

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAINED

Bailey, John F.

 

?

 

Bailey, Maria

 

 

 

Baker, Marie

 

?

 

Boyhan, Victor

?

 

 

Brennan, Shay

?

 

 

Cuffe, Jennifer

?

 

 

Curran, Chris

 

 

 

Daly, Kevin

?

 

 

Devlin, Cormac

 

 

 

Dockery, Liam

?

 

 

Donnelly, Deirdre

?

 

 

Fayne, Mary

 

 

 

Feeney, Kate

?

 

 

Gill, Karl

?

 

 

Halpin, Melisa

?

 

 

Hanafin, Mary

 

 

?

Hand, Pat

 

 

 

Horkan, Gerry

?

 

 

Humphreys, Richard

?

 

 

Kingston, Deirdre

?

 

 

Lewis, Hugh

?

 

 

Madigan, Josepha

 

 

 

Martin, Catherine

?

 

 

McCarthy, Lettie

?

 

 

McGovern, Lynsey

 

 

 

Merrigan, Michael

?

 

 

Murphy, Brian

?

 

 

Murphy, Tom

?

 

 

NicCormaic, Sorcha

 

 

 

O’Brien, Peter

?

 

 

O’Brien, Shane

?

 

 

O’Callaghan, Denis

?

 

 

O’Neill, Seamas

?

 

 

Richmond, Neale

 

 

 

Saul, Barry

 

 

?

Smyth, Carrie

?

 

 

Smyth, Ossian

?

 

 

Stewart, Patricia

 

 

?

Tallon, Grace

?

 

 

Ward, Barry

?

 

 

TOTAL:

26

2

3

 

AnCathaoirleach Councillor M. Baker declared the amended Motion CARRIED

 

 

228.

Declaration

It was NOTED that during the discussion Councillor R. Humphreys stated his constituency office was located in a Kenny built house and that the Motion was not of any beneficial interest to the owners of these dwellings.

 

229.

PAGE 149 6.1.3.8 POLICY AR8 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 164 pdf icon PDF 30 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor H. Lewis.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.3.8. Policy AR8: Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Buildings, estates and Features, page 149, in the first paragraph (i) of this section after the words ‘and estates’ insert the words ‘including areas of early social housing’ to ensure that the character of the Council’s own early twentieth century social housing stock and streetscapes are not compromised.”

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. J. Craig, Acting Conservation Officer  and Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Member’s queries.

 

It was AGREED to INSERT the following words “urban and  after “Some”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

The Chief Executive report was AGREED subject to the above amendment.

 

 

230.

PAGE 149 6.1.3.9 POLICY AR9 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION 165 pdf icon PDF 28 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor S. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.3.9. Policy AR9: Protection of Historic Street Furniture, page 149, in the first paragraph (i) of this section after the words ‘of the area’ insert the words ‘including items of a vernacular or local significance’ as such are much valued by local communities.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. J. Craig, Acting Conservation Officer  and Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries.

 

The Motion was AGREED.

 

 

231.

PAGE 150 6.1.3.10 POLICY AR10 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 166 pdf icon PDF 43 KB

 

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor M. Halpin.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.3.10. Policy AR10: Protection of Coastline Heritage, page 150, insert after the words ‘built heritage’ in the penultimate sentence of the second paragraph ‘including Dún Laoghaire Baths’ as it is a very significant piece of our coastline heritage.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries,

 

The Motion was AGREED.

 

 

232.

PAGE 151 6.1.4.1 POLICY AR12 DELETION OF WORDS - MOTION NO. 167 pdf icon PDF 37 KB

 

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor V. Boyhan.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.4.1. Policy AR12: Architectural Conservation Areas, page 151, in section (iii), delete the words ‘whilst simultaneously encouraging contemporary design’ to end the sentence with the word ‘scale’ as this is more appropriate to ACAs".

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. J. Craig, Acting Conservation Officer , and Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries,

 

The Chief Executive’s report was AGREED.

 

 

233.

POLICY AR14 SECTION 6.1.4.3 PROPOSED CHANGE OF TEXT - MOTION NO. 168 pdf icon PDF 40 KB

It was proposed by Councillor C. Martin and seconded by Councillor O. Smyth.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

Re Policy AR14 Section 6.1.4.3

 

Proposed change of text in bold print

Ensure that new shop fronts are well designed through the use of traditional materials and designed and constructed in traditional methodology relative to scale and proportion of the specific ACA.

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. J. Craig, Acting Conservation Officer, and Ms. K. Holohan, Deputy Chief Executive responded to Members’ queries,  Motion No. 168 was PUT.  A roll call vote was then called for which resulted as follows:-

 

COUNCILLORS:

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAINED

Bailey, John F.

 

?

 

Bailey, Maria

 

?

 

Baker, Marie

 

?

 

Boyhan, Victor

?

 

 

Brennan, Shay

 

?

 

Cuffe, Jennifer

 

?

 

Curran, Chris

?

 

 

Daly, Kevin

 

?

 

Devlin, Cormac

 

?

 

Dockery, Liam

 

?

 

Donnelly, Deirdre

 

?

 

Fayne, Mary

?

 

 

Feeney, Kate

 

?

 

Gill, Karl

?

 

 

Halpin, Melisa

?

 

 

Hanafin, Mary

 

?

 

Hand, Pat

 

?

 

Horkan, Gerry

 

?

 

Humphreys, Richard

 

?

 

Kingston, Deirdre

 

?

 

Lewis, Hugh

?

 

 

Madigan, Josepha

 

 

 

Martin, Catherine

?

 

 

McCarthy, Lettie

 

?

 

McGovern, Lynsey

 

?

 

Merrigan, Michael

?

 

 

Murphy, Brian

 

 

 

Murphy, Tom

 

?

 

NicCormaic, Sorcha

 

 

 

O’Brien, Peter

 

?

 

O’Brien, Shane

?

 

 

O’Callaghan, Denis

 

?

 

O’Neill, Seamas

 

?

 

Richmond, Neale

 

?

 

Saul, Barry

?

 

 

Smyth, Carrie

 

?

 

Smyth, Ossian

?

 

 

Stewart, Patricia

 

?

 

Tallon, Grace

 

?

 

Ward, Barry

?

 

 

TOTAL:

12

25

 

 

AnCathaorileach Councillor M. Baker declared the Motion DEFEATED.

 

 

234.

PAGE 152 6.1.4.6 POLICY AR17 INSERTION OF WORDS - MOTION 169 pdf icon PDF 39 KB

It was proposed by Councillor M. Merrigan and seconded by Councillor P. O’Brien.

 

“That this Planning Authority pursuant to Section 11 (5)(c) of the Planning & Development Act 2000 (as amended) resolves to amend the Chief Executive's  Draft Development Plan as follows:-

 

That in 6.1.4.6.Policy AR17: Development within a cACA, page 152, insert after the word ‘streetscape’ the words ‘and, where appropriate, its associated seascape’ to take into account the unique character of the coastal areas of the County.”

 

The report of the Chief Executive was CONSIDERED.

 

Following a discussion during which Ms. J. Craig, Acting Conservation Officer responded to Members’ queries.

 

The Chief Executive’s Report was AGREED.

 

 

235.

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

It was AGREED to adjourn the meeting to 5.00p.m. on Thursday 12th February 2015.

 

 

236.

CONCLUSION OF MEETING

The Meeting concluded at 10.30p.m.